On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 5/27/2010 10:37, JD Zheng wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> We were told Qt will be the primary UI toolkit (and App framework) for >> MeeGo from the day we heard MeeGo, but seems people, esp. developer who >> is doing *real* UX development, have different ideas about it (see >> original thread). >> > > All applications/etc will use Qt. Even the MeeGo ones. We have some legacy > apps > that don't use Qt, but those are on a path to be converted to use Qt or be > replaced. > (and there may be 3rd party legacy apps that will keep using what they do; > Chromium > could be an example of that) > > Good to hear that! Considering it is huge effort to convert or replace, I'd suggest we can start some small projects, maybe per app, to do the conversion as UI design for a certain app is clear. > The Window Manager (and it's very close friends) are not "Applications" in > this sense, > and may use technology that is appropriate for their problem domain, which > may or may > not include Qt. > > Yes, the WM or compositor is transparent to application and relatively independent to other parts of UI framework so that we can have more choices. > > > Also if we were going to do Qt for some UX and, for example, GTK for >> others, do we still think we would have a unified platform? Shall we >> focus on one framework after 1.0 was out? >> > > GTK is only available to run legacy applications, and should not be used > for any new development for MeeGo. > (This "for legacy only" also means that for example we're unlikely to go to > gtk 3.0 > when it comes out, but rather we stay at the 2.x version train) > > > How about maintaining current GTK apps for example? Probably we don't want to spend too much time on them.
_______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
