On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 08:00 +0100, danny staple wrote:
> Good plan,
> 
> I like that - if the MFC conversion is easier, and the MFC version is
> more feature full, then this may be a place to start. Considering each
> system specific version has its own dir, as Leonardo suggests, you do
> not even need to branch for it. Nice. If I get a chance (albeit I may
> not for a while), I will pitch in on that. Perhaps if some of the
> tasks could be made as trac tickets on the gerf.org site, then I can
> cherrypick one or two to have a crack at.
> 
> Leonardo - do you have test scripts (even manual scripts) for Leocad?
> If not, maybe I can take a look at creating some for you and putting
> them on the wiki or unit tests in the repo.
> 
> Cheers,
> Danny
> 

alternatively, you could try GtkMM (the c++ binding)

> 2008/7/27 Henrik Sundberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I've run some of the Qt tutorials today. Very nice.
> > I started to make a .pro (Qt project) file for Leocad.
> >
> > Migration from Mfc to Qt is described, but not from Gtk, and there are
> > tools for converting Mfc resources to Qt.
> >
> > Is the linux-version far behind the windows version? I.e. would it not
> > only be a greater effort, but also give a poorer result, if the gtk
> > version is used as source?
> >
> > And does the trunk differ to much from 0.75, making it difficult to merge?
> >
> > /$
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leocad mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://list.gerf.org/listinfo/leocad
> >
> 
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Leocad mailing list
[email protected]
https://list.gerf.org/listinfo/leocad

Reply via email to