Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Wednesday 21 June 2006 00:52, Donnie Berkholz wrote: >> Yes, you will need to introduce a qt4 flag as upstreams >> port packages to qt5, if they choose to also retain a qt4 frontend. > You're trying to compare gtk to qt directly. They are not the same. > gtk regards only the graphic library, qt is a library of utility functions > too. Qt can be considered like gtk+glib, and that make things more complex.
How does that matter in this context? > As I said, I'd rather see two flags, qt3 and qt4, to identify the two > versions. A simpler alternative would be qt (defaults to 3) and qt4, but > that's going to be confused on the long run to something similar to gtk. I disagree with this and agree with Caleb's earlier suggestion. Presumably he has some clue what he's talking about when it comes to qt. Thanks, Donnie
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
