Am 2017-11-03 21:30, schrieb Martin Koller:
Hi all,

I'd like to announce an application I've implemented over the last few
weeks - liquidshell

liquidshell is a replacement for plasmashell

It does not use QtQuick but instead relies on QtWidgets,
therefore no hardware graphics acceleration is needed.

[snip]

The main motivation was to have a reliable desktop shell which does
not hog the CPU or RAM.
(CPU usage and stability were the things driving me mad with plasmashell)
It should be slick and have just the features I need in my daily
work. No need having all the bells and whistles anyone can think of.
Just have a plain, solid, fast workhorse.

I'm now playing devils advocate: which window manager are you using? If I understand correctly this is supposed to be a replacement for plasmashell in Plasma, which would mean that you use KWin.

Are you aware that KWin uses QtQuick for all its UI elements, such as Alt+TAB? Isn't that also a memory and resource hog? Shouldn't you come up with a replacement for KWin as well?

Also concerning no hardware graphics acceleration needed: who is going to render your UI? Do you really think the QPainter API is the best and most efficent to render a UI? Especially considering that in the end the whole thing needs to be transferred to the GPU. Are you aware that the compositor uses hardware acceleration to render the UI? If you don't use a compositor: are you aware that XServer itself uses hardware acceleration to render its UI (check glamor). Are you aware that if you don't have hardware acceleration everything is going to be rendered through llvmpipe? Do you really think QPainter is better than llvmpipe? Because I - having worked with that stuff for years in a low level area - doubt so.

I don't mind what you develop in your spare time. Not at all. What I mind is if a product is added to KDE as a competitor/replacement to a product I work on because of misunderstood things. What I see here is that you completely misunderstood what hardware acceleration means and gives to the system. I know, I know more than 90 % and all the "lightweight" people get this wrong. But you know what I observed more and more over the last years: people praise Plasma for the fast speed, responsiveness and low memory consumption. Why is that so, why do people no longer consider our software as bloated? Because we use QML and we use it well!

So if that gets added I want to have it made clear that this is not a "lightweight" product and I don't want it to be advertised as not using hardware acceleration. I don't want to see what you list in the main motivation. Because that will just result in people going all "KDE dev develops new desktop shell, because Plasma is unreliable". If that happens it pisses me off! And that's what's going to happen the way you phrased it. And what would piss me even more of is if that is due to you misunderstanding hardware acceleration.

Cheers
Martin
KWin maintainer

Reply via email to