On Friday 20 July 2012 00:47:35 Alex Fiestas wrote: > On Thursday 19 July 2012 21:18:50 Marco Martin wrote: > > anybody can think about technical problems about it that may be lurking? > > it may mean a release of the workspace that doesn't use completely > > frameworks, so both old kdelibs and the frameworks will have to be > > distributed for some time, may this be a problem? (but not avoidable > > probably) > > Uh... please don't eat me :) > > Do we really want to support qgv? it is a super big chunk of code we will > have to maintain for, waht gain? > > Pros: > - Keeping compatibility > - Not having to port everything to QML before switching to frameworks > - ... ? > > Cons: > - Big chunk of code to maintain > - QGV dropped by Qt project > - People not porting to QML because QGV work. > - We will piss people off > > How difficult would be to support ? would be possible to keep supporting it > when QML2 come to play? Very big con: users will hate us if we redo a 4.0 in Plasma and dropping QGV before everything is ported would mean doing a 4.0. And if we wait till everything is ported to QML we won't go anywhere.
So yes I think we just have to support QGV, whether we like or not.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Plasma-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
