Krita 1.6: my proposal

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Monday 06 February 2006 20:39, Casper Boemann wrote:
r> On Monday 06 February 2006 20:30, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> > Well, I think we will simply need the time ourselves, if we want the port
> > to be more than just a port, but to make use of the improvements Qt4
> > makes possbile. Besides, I don't want to duck out of my responsibility to
> > koffice to such an extent.
>
> No I also want to help out, but with both a 1.6 and 2.0 being done
> concurrently both are actually in a kind of freeze. Or we would end up with
> a lot of merging
>
> I really fear this scenario. Lots of housekeeping to have two versions at
> the same time. Also this will effectively kill my interest in developing
> for 1.6

I was hoping that keeping 1.6 core relatively stable would help here -- of 
course, 2.0 will change rather rapidly, if only because of QPtrList :-(.

>
> And if nothing is going into 1.6 then the argument about loosing pr for
> krita over gimp is just as valid as ever.
>
> > Well... I wouldn't count on it. The latest news is that all application
> > developers are called upon to drop work on their apps and help out with
> > kdelibs because that still hasn't progressed beyond trying to get rid of
> > qt3support.
>
> Doesn't sound nice

I'm not happy at all at the moment, and there are moments I wish Krita was a 
Qt-only application.

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt 
http://www.valdyas.org/fading/index.cgi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/attachments/20060206/7f6b0089/attachment-0001.pgp