Laszlo Papp lpapp at kde.org
Fri May 4 09:44:26 UTC 2012

On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Simion Ploscariu
<simion at designersbookshop.com> wrote:
> Hi Laszo,sorry for the name mistake

Now, the second 'l' is missing. ;)

> I understand but it seems harsh to give a vote down without trying the
> application.

Hmm, perhaps I used too much review tool recently, like gerrit. In any
case, -1 does not mean I am totally against the idea, do not do this.
That is -2. :) -1 is just that I have concerns. Please do not take the
situation this hard. :-)

> About the UI, after you try it you can say exactly what you do not like about
> it, saying you do not like Qt Quick  and Plasma is not enough for a developer,
> maybe you want a cleaner interface an option could be added for that.

I have developed a plasma components based simple application. I have
packaged the whole stack up to the Plasma Components on t he N9
device. I was there at the Plasma Active sprint. I even tried this out
on different platforms than desktop (namely Harmattan instead of the
Harmattan components). I have a rough idea about this. ;)

To be quite honest, I prefer other solutions better like I wrote. As
for me, qt desktop components is a better way to go even if it is a
research project. Saying that "Plasma Components" are themable is
overrated in this situation since it is not something I would do, plus
even if this has the feature for that, it does not mean there is such
a replacement for the desktop player style in any case.

I am really not getting the point of deleting the current application
without preserving the option for build that for the time being. Once
the qt desktop components becomes more mature (or even before that),
we could have a plasma-free solution, I would happy with.

Best Regards,
Laszlo Papp

More information about the kde-edu mailing list