On Feb 10, 11:08 am, Etienne Samson <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not really against ditching v1 totally in favor of the new  
> architecture, because that means I can restart a development cycle (I  
> had been breaking people's triggers file while trying to fix  
> encapsulated triggers).
>
> Opinions ?

First off, thanks a huge bunch Etienne, your builds are significantly
better than the original when running Leopard IMO, and I really
appreciate your effort. I'm very happy to hear fighting talk on
keeping QS alive for a while longer. Though QSB is promising, it is
severely limited in functionality terms compared to QS, and I seem to
see that many of the power features will never make it to QSB. The
fact it doesn't even handle a third pane input means its UI will never
be as elegant as QS.

I don't think you should be trying to get V2 working. That is a
significant undertaking, unless you feel confident you can get a
working system with the resources you are able to afford. I'd love to
see Elements, Crucible and others working on an optimised new core,
but it doesn't seem like the most practical path. Fixing V1 some more
to make it robust under Leopard bit by bit seems like a better option
to me. You give the community a great present to have a tool we
already all use daily and make it better. Would be great if you could
add some of the V2 bits into V1 over time. But the problem with QS is
not that it needs new features, the problem many people have with QS
is that it is unstable for some, which you can have a greater impact
on fixing.

I'd love to see some more Cocoa programmers willing to help you out,
and as we've seaid many times before, I think we could get a paypal
money pot set up to pay developer bounties on bugfixes and feature
additions...

Reply via email to