Hello, Phil Thompson wrote:
Major transitions (Qt3 => Qt4, Python2 => Python3) should be considered as opportunities for rewrites. They should not be treated as "how can I get from one to the other with as few changes as possible".
I thought the way the Python guys handled Python 3 was very good. Just break what (really) needs to be broken and clear the way for future enhancements. Although porting of applications is still needed, they've stayed away from trivial and stylistic 'fixes' to Python and the libs which bring a lot more porting work for little real world gain. Things like changing the naming of classes and modules names etc fall into the stylistic change category in my book.
I hope Phil can stick to the really needed stuff. Porting stuff from Qt/KDE 3 to 4 has proven to be draining work which I hope to avoid having to do again in the near future.
cheers, -- Simon Edwards | KDE-NL, Guidance tools, Guarddog Firewall [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.simonzone.com/software/ Nijmegen, The Netherlands | "ZooTV? You made the right choice." _______________________________________________ PyQt mailing list PyQt@riverbankcomputing.com http://www.riverbankcomputing.com/mailman/listinfo/pyqt
