Em Sun, 5 Oct 2003 16:08:06 +0100, Tom Badran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escreveu:
> On Sunday 05 October 2003 15:45, Tom wrote:
> > I disagree. GUI apps in Linux are so wildly disparate that knowing the
> > basic architecture is pretty important for me to decide whether or not I
> > want it.
>
> I sec
On Sunday 05 October 2003 17:10, Tom wrote:
> Whether or not an app is GTK1, GTK2, Tcl/Tk, or QT3 makes a big
> difference to this. So yes, the library doesn't matter, but the core
> feature set is kinda relevant. Maybe you could find another way to
> describe it.
That's what package tags can be
On Sunday 05 October 2003 16:22, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> KDE in the description makes more sense, IMHO, than Qt. The same goes
> gtk+ and GNOME.
Agree.
> A user should know which enviromnent he picked -- while he may totally
> ignore that KDE is using Qt, for instance.
>
> Descriptions should only c
Tom Badran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> On Sunday 05 October 2003 15:45, Tom wrote:
> > I disagree. GUI apps in Linux are so wildly disparate that knowing the
> > basic architecture is pretty important for me to decide whether or not I
> > want it.
>
> I second that, i consider that a very g
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 05:03:54PM +0200, Mathieu Roy wrote:
> Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapot? :
>
> > I disagree. GUI apps in Linux are so wildly disparate that knowing the
> > basic architecture is pretty important for me to decide whether or not I
> > want it.
>
> What a normal user care a
On Sunday 05 October 2003 15:45, Tom wrote:
> I disagree. GUI apps in Linux are so wildly disparate that knowing the
> basic architecture is pretty important for me to decide whether or not I
> want it.
I second that, i consider that a very good guideline for how likely a package
is going to int
Tom writes:
> I disagree. GUI apps in Linux are so wildly disparate that knowing the
> basic architecture is pretty important for me to decide whether or not I
> want it.
Only a small minority of users know what GTK+ means. Those that do also
know how to check the dependencies.
--
John Hasler
[
Tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> I disagree. GUI apps in Linux are so wildly disparate that knowing the
> basic architecture is pretty important for me to decide whether or not I
> want it.
What a normal user care about is the purpose and features of software,
not the libraries (toolkit) u
debacle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a tapoté :
> Hi,
>
> sometimes I read package descriptions I'm not happy with.
> E.g. the description starts: "Foobar is a GTK+ application,
> that enables blah..." where foobar is a user application,
> not mainly for GTK+ programmers. Of course, the user
> doesn't/sh
On Sun, Oct 05, 2003 at 02:25:57PM +, debacle wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sometimes I read package descriptions I'm not happy with.
> E.g. the description starts: "Foobar is a GTK+ application,
> that enables blah..." where foobar is a user application,
> not mainly for GTK+ programmers. Of course, the
10 matches
Mail list logo
