Fair point - to be honest I really don’t want to do the GUI work, and think that the resistance against Qt is extremely …. how should I say, unfortunate.
Sometimes the most effective way of motivating me is to make me angry. The “fine, i’ll write my own damn cross-platform UI toolkit” response is what’s been driving me the fast few days :) But I agree this is work other equally-capable members of the project could do, my time is best devoted to Flat (which I enjoy working on much more). Dennis, is the UI abstraction layer something you would be willing to contribute to? — Dr Peter M. Kelly pmke...@apache.org PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966) > On 5 Aug 2015, at 1:29 pm, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > With all due respect I am a bit concerned. > > I think the interface to Qt and e.g. Cocoa, is a important interface for > the project, so we should discuss the general design before you start just > programming. I have > no doubt that you are capable of doing it, but I am also sure there are > other people (like myself) who also have experience can attribute > positively to make the > interface more flexible and a community effort. > > My second concern is that you are also working on "flat", which seems to me > to be the most critical part for the project. I have a good understanding > of what you are developing, but I am pretty sure the others don´t. > > You do not want to be the main programmer, but by taking all the > interesting pieces and leaving bread crumbs, you will continue to stay the > main developer. I > am not the one to block you from doing things, but I would wish you would > concentrate on getting flat to a condition where we can release it. The > editor framework is > surely a lower priority and can be done by others (e.g. me) of course with > the input from the rest of the team. > > I know you have a fantastic energy and burn for the project, so please do > not read this as I am criticizing, please read it as a concern as to how we > get others > to be main developers alongside you. > > We do not get new main developers, by developing pieces to interfaces you > have defined. Taking me as the example, I have Qt experience (did core work > on Qt years ago) but have 0% interest in developing code to a given > interface for a platform I do not care about, so I would do other things > (like I just did 32/64bit and zip), but > it means I would not be a main developer. > > rgds > jan i. > > > > On 5 August 2015 at 05:53, Peter Kelly <pmke...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> On 4 Aug 2015, at 11:46 pm, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> The actual construction of a functioning editor that might be available >> in a source release and also a convenience binary for one or more platforms >> is a bit down the road. I understand that. >>> >>> Nevertheless, I am concerned that this podling is playing with fire and >> tempting unfortunate consequences. >>> >>> I just want to give fair warning that even an "example" having only >> unapproved dependencies may be frowned upon if one cannot build a fully >> functioning version from the release without such a dependency. Satisfying >> that condition would be a great example and also in the spirit and letter >> of ASF requirements for software provided by its projects. >>> >>> The NULL case that I have seen described does not qualify as >> fully-functioning, in my opinion. I look forward to further details in >> that approach so one can explore providing a reference version having full >> functionality the substitutability of dependencies, including optional use >> of Qt. >> >> As part of the abstraction layer I am developing, my intention is to make >> a Cocoa backend (Apple’s API for building native OS X apps), as well as a >> Qt backend. Thus we will have at least one platform on which it is possible >> to build a fully-functioning version of the editor, and thus we can include >> it as a core component of a Corinthia distribution. >> >> The Qt backend will be optional in the sense that someone can choose not >> to use it, if they prefer to instead write their own abstraction layer for >> whatever platform they are targeting. >> >> Contributions in the form of code to help support more platforms without >> Qt will be very welcome. >> >> — >> Dr Peter M. Kelly >> pmke...@apache.org >> >> PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key> >> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966) >> >>
