On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek <jakub.rusinek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Arthur Pemberton pisze: > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Pekka Pietikainen<pp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 07:59:21PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> > People who choose to do the development did it in whatever toolkit and > >> > language they preferred. Nothing is stopping you from duplicating that work > >> > in whatever toolkit you prefer or even porting Yast to Fedora but writing > >> > in one toolkit is not discriminating any desktop environment. It might not > >> > be ideal but works fine. > >> It's probably still worth checking out. > >> > >> Worst case after lots of work the UI library forces some crappy subset of > >> Qt/GTK/text on all the config tools (Inherently such a library will always > >> limit what you can do with the UI) + extra bloat (since you'll still need > >> GTK or Qt) > >> > >> Best case current functionality is kept (for little conversion work), people > >> get their native UI look and we get a kick-ass text UI as a bonus. > >> > >> Reality? Something in the middle, I'm sure ;) > >> > >> -- > >> Pekka Pietikainen > > > > > > Maybe I am the one who is confused, but from what I read at the link, > > they decoupled the GUI from the C++ library which did the actual work, > > the idea being so that others could write new GUIs and just plug in to > > the library. > > > > You guys are talking like it's the other way around, there is no > > subset of widgets or anything of the sort. Aside from the fact that I > > think the backend code for manipulating config files should be in a > > transparent scripting language, I don't see how Yast would help. > > > > YaST has nothing to do here. UI library was separated from YaST, and > it's all about. I was mistaken. -- Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine ( www.pembo13.com ) -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
