On 22/06/10 16:13, Thiago Macieira wrote: > Em Terça-feira 22 Junho 2010, às 17:04:41, Arjan van de Ven escreveu: >> On 6/22/2010 7:45 AM, Tomas Frydrych wrote: >>> On 22/06/10 15:22, Arjan van de Ven wrote: >>>> "Normal" applications are expected to just use the Qt Multimedia APIs to >>>> play media, and not talk to gstreamer directly. >>>> However, at the same time we realize that specialist type of >>>> applications may want to have more finegrained and detailed control than >>>> the Qt Multimedia API allows (which is somewhat of an abstraction after >>>> all), so we have >>>> to allow direct access to gstreamer as well, to not make really >>>> interesting applications impossible. >>> >>> Which kind of opens the whole question of what is the point providing an >>> extra abstraction on the top of the GStreamer abstraction in the first >>> place, does it not ? >> >> No it doesn't; if all you want to do is play some movie or sound, the Qt >> Mobility is more than plenty. >> if you want to write a super advanced video editing application, maybe >> you want a deeper level of control. > > Not to mention that GStreamer isn't common in other platforms than Linux. > > You may not care about them, and MeeGo also probably doesn't, but Qt does. >
This is entirely irrelevant; MeeGo *is* Linux, and we are not discussing Qt architecture here, but MeeGo architecture. Ultimately the MeeGo architecture must make engineering sense in itself, and should not be restricted by the limitations that Qt is imposing on itself in its strive to be a cross-platform toolkit. Qt should be a means to an end on MeeGo, not the end itself. Tomas > > > > _______________________________________________ > MeeGo-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev _______________________________________________ MeeGo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
