[kplato] Moving Forward

[Thomas Zander]

On Sat, Jun 30, 2001 at 05:18:37PM -0700, Chris Clarke wrote:
> Hey,
> 
> Since it's been a while since I've seen any serious traffic on this list, I'd 
> say that our initial requirements discussion seems to be over.  Sounds like 
> this means we can start getting into the details.
> 
> There seem to be two major areas that we should concentrate on now (IMO).  
> The first is deciding on some of the design constraints that we've put off.  
> Specifically, deciding on the following:
> 
> 1) License: The general consensus seemed to be GPL, but there were a couple 
> of dissenting opinions.  Can we have a vote on what the most popular choice 
> is?

I'd say use LGPL.

- It guarentees the code is and always will be free (speach) to use, to hack and to 
  distribute.
- It guarantees compatability with KOffice (which uses this as well)
- It guarantees the software is always free (beer) and no company can sell 
  this for big bugs.
- It also gives any company persmission to write 3th party plugins for KPlato
  which they can sell (and keep propiatary if they wish). This last point is
  not something I openly support, but I don't want to cut off that option.

 
> 2) Language of development: There seemed to be a debate between C++ and Java. 
>  My personal opinion is for C++, because I think its easiest to work with the 
> KDE libraries.  How about a vote on this one?

C++ is best since this means you can use KOffice. Using java will not allow 
this, there are no java bindings for KOffice, there are only java bindings for
QT.

 
-- 
Thomas Zander                                            zander@earthling.net
The only thing worse than failure is the fear of trying something new