On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 07:49:14PM +0200, Liviu Andronic wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 7:24 PM, José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Think about lyx-kde in the same foot as lyx-gtk, as being alternatives to > > lyx-qt. > > To know that lyx-qt will survive no matter other developments is good > news already. ^_^ > > > > FWIW if lyx-gtk was popular you could have a lyx-gnome to add to the > > party. > > I would venture to say that lyx-gtk can become popular,
So far, all attempts in this direction were complete failures. They did not even manage to port all existing functionality, let alone producing something "better". I personally would not have a problem with that if it wasted only the resources of the people directly involved in the attempt, but the whole idea ate a significant amount of resources of others, and I even go as far as claiming that the infrastructure developed around the idea of keeping a "GUI independent LyX core" basically stalled LyX development for half a decade. > as popular as lyx-qt. There is a big gtk-horde (I'm part of it) > wandering around Linux, and often this horde is very reticent to QT > applications (even when these are not KDE linked). And usually without good reason. Neither technical nor political ones actually. > I much hope that some developer will > get interested in making this frontend functional. Feel free to take the latest LyX/GTK incarnation, brush it up and come back when you are done. Andre' PS: > > The only that is missing from this picture is lyx-cli (xterm). But for > > Well, you can go back to pure LaTeX in, say, nano, and you're not far > away from lyx-cli. Oh, well, point-and-click will be missing. ^_~ The idea was to have a similar functionality as the typical 'decent texteditor', not 'nano'. SCNR :-)
