Tim Moore wrote:
> [...] That doesn't change the fact that it would
> be a great deal of work to port our GUI to Qt, and it would introduce a
> very large external dependency. Having seen the fit pitched when I started
> usineg boost...
I think the biggest stumbling block with introducing boost had been
forcing people to install a version of Boost which isn't available with
their distributions. This has been in contrast to the tradition in
FlightGear of being overly conservative about the versions of 3rd party
libraries.
Note that this statement is not to be counted as a vote for introducing
Qt (even in a 'conservative' version number). From my perspective Qt is
far too 'fat' as a tool to work on a task which is obviously of
secondary importance in FlightGear.
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation
Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business
Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts
Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
