On Wed, Apr 09, 2008 at 03:58:36PM +0200, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > So, I guess I can post a situation update now. > > As I've said, I've completely lost interest in Linux on the desktop. > I've come to realize that it's pretty much hopeless, so I'm now a > happy OS X user (since january).
Sad to hear about the former, happy about the latter ;) > That doesn't mean I've lost interest in Rosegarden, though. For a > brief moment I considered porting it "as is" (i.e. though Qt4) to OS > X. However, several things have made me change my mind : > > - there's no chance we'd get any Mac dev interested if we're using > Qt4. It's just too antique compared to Cocoa. > - Cocoa is a very impressive development framework > - it's pretty hard to motivate yourself to use inferior tools just to > keep compatibility with a hostile platform. > > So my plan is to try writing a very basic, prototype RG on OS X, re- > using code whenever possible (the fact that Objective C can freely be > mixed with C++ helps), and try to attract other OS X devs. If nobody > is interested, I'll probably just drop the whole thing. Sounds like an interesting project. I would personally probably make other choices (for example, the fact that using Qt4 would probably scare away some developers, for me, would be outweighed by the fact that using Cocoa would certainly disqualify any developer using Linux as his platform). However, who am I do decide what choices you should make? Personally, I'd like to wish you good luck and fun on this project, and hope we'll be able to share as much code as possible - even though we went separate ways for the 'presentation layer' (loosely speaking). As for a name, I agree that it might be confusing to call the new project 'Rosegarden' also, because it's entirely imaginable that some future version of the QT Rosegarden will also run on MacOS X. Once that time comes, I hope we can share even more code and effort there. Who knows. I would like to consider this new project somewhat of a 'sister project' of Rosegarden itself, rather than another 'version'. As such it'd make sense to use a different, but related name - such as 'Pagoda' just to give a silly example. Of course, I'm just a minor contributor, and my words shouldn't be weighed as heavily as those of some of the more seasoned Rosegardeners here, but I figured I'd chime in for a bit ;). Arnout ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
