scott chevalley wrote:
I agree on most of these points, the only benefit being that it may then be possible to integrate the Drake tools into the Kde control center if they were based on QT. Other than that I just think that having a consistent interface that looks good is what matters, not what toolkit it uses. just my 0.02 worth...I was just reading today how some big KDE players like David Faure think PerlQT3 is great.
Scott
It shouldn't be too much work to port existing tools. They could use yet another rewrite anyway. From a user's (and admin's) perspective the config tools are some of the most important reasons to pick Mandrake.
Maybe GTK apps are more 'neutral' with regard to their looks, but instead, consider how much of the userbase uses KDE. In fact, when Mandrake first started, KDE was *the* main selling point.
Since I will guess that 70% of Mandrake users use KDE and not GNOME, it might be better to use a KDE (or QT) LNF. I think the reason GTK was chosen in the first place (besides maybe QT bindings not being available), is that GTK is what the Mandrake coders knew, so the choice seems arbitrary rather than based on 'looks'.
--
Sincerely,
David Walluck
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
msg79376/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
