About the version numbering, I already discussed that a long time ago, and it had no effect back then.
In my opinion the current requirements are impossible to achieve, just look at the Qt (yes Qt, not lcl-qt) list of open bugs, its huge and they are a private company with many full-time developers and are in version 4.5 and their quality is very high. It's impossible to have a software without bugs. Whenever a bug is fixed another is found, you can see Lazarus remains at almost constant 900 bug count. When a bug is fixed, more people use Lazarus and then they find new bugs. And also the easier to solve bugs are solved first, then you remain with harder bugs which take more time to solve. In my university we learn that 90% of the time of a project is necessary for the last 10% of the fixes. But the proponents of the restrictive numbering do have a case that the gtk2 interface has an awful lot of bugs, which makes behavior between platforms inconsistent. You can't say that the change from gtk to gtk2 cause this, rather gtk was even much worse because of structural limits of gtk. In the long run I expect that if gtk2 doesn't improve, then the Qt interface will improve beyond it and we will have a Lazarus 1.0 in 1 or 2 years with one of the two. On Sun, Nov t9, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Florian Klaempfl <[email protected]> wrote: > As far as I understood, it's an axiom of the lazarus project to use the > native widgetset ;) Yes and no, we can use non-native widgets with lcl-qt, or futurely with lcl-fpgui. -- Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
