[kplato] Moving Forward

[Jim Sabatke]

Thomas Zander wrote:

>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.
>
I think that compatibility with KOffice is a good idea.  LPGL is fine by me.

>
> 
>
>>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.
>
> 
>
Again, for compatibility with KOffice, C++ is my choice.

-- 
Jim Sabatke
SuSE 7.1 Linux
Kernel - 2.4.0
http://www.execpc.com/~jsabatke

"First God made the idiot; that was for practice. Then he made school boards." Mark Twain