Openmoko community
> discussion
>
> Betreff:
> Re: QtMoko and FSO (was: qtmoko
> v33)
> Datum:
> Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:48:28 +0300
> (2011-03-09 20:48:28)
>
>
> Hi,
>
Hi,
I hope there is still some chances that Radek will change his dicision.
> From my point of view where is no real need in FSO/qt gibrid, because of
following reasons:
1. qt stack has richer functionalily, better performance, and less bugs
than that FSO dbus/vala thing (don't throw rotten t
Gennady Kupava, Mar. 09, 2011, 22:48 +0300:
> 1. qt stack has richer functionalily, better performance, and less bugs
> than that FSO dbus/vala thing (don't throw rotten tomatoes to me plese)
> 2. qt has it's own resource management, FSO - it's own, rewriting qt one
> to FSO one is worthless effort
Agree with Gennady. Look what happened to SHR!
It is also necessary to fix rndis & usb-host )
On Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:48:28 +0300, Gennady Kupava wrote:
Hi,
I hope there is still some chances that Radek will change his
dicision.
From my point of view where is no real need in FSO/qt gibrid, be
Hi,
I hope there is still some chances that Radek will change his dicision.
From my point of view where is no real need in FSO/qt gibrid, because of
following reasons:
1. qt stack has richer functionalily, better performance, and less bugs
than that FSO dbus/vala thing (don't throw rotten tomato
Dmitry Chistikov wrote:
> I'm afraid it's too early to ask, but could you give an estimate on how
> much time it'll take to enable the use of FSO framework? Just something
> like "about a year" or, say, "not less than four months".
Writing simple dialer application could be matter of days/hours.
Radek Polak, Mar. 04, 2011, 07:37 +0100:
> i have uploaded new qtmoko v33 images to sourceforge now [1]. [...]
> The list is quite short on how much of work it was.
Hello, Radek! Thank you for the work you are doing.
> Most of the effort was to package everything with debian package system. This
7 matches
Mail list logo
