Quick point from the Razor side of things
None of us have any wish to alienate current LXDE users; there's many valid
reasons to prefer a GTK-oriented DE.
That said, there's plenty of choice when it comes to lightweight GTK DEs. I
personally fully support this new direction though I think it should be
If there are LXDE devs interested in talking about this, feel free to pop
in #razor-qt on freenode and ping me (Adys) or another Razor dev.
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 12:06 AM, gary sheppard <rhyotte@...> wrote:
> What effect will all of these new features have on memory, and CPU usage
> for pcmanfm 1.2 beta?
> QT5 is being developed to work well all the way down to smart phones. Are
> you sure GTK2 is very much lighter in system weight?
> Another point is: Many distro's are dropping GTK2 or have said they will
> do so very soon as it is getting more difficult to support New and Old.
> I will say, I like LXDE. I also like Razor QT. In my opinion as a user, it
> would be wise to plan to fully merge the projects cores or their entirety
> when QT5 is adopted. Till then, co-operate as much as possible. Plan now on
> how to "tool up" for your separate looks.
> I can hardly wait to see what comes in future cooperative releases.
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Andrej N. Gritsenko <andrej@...:
>> I reply to two letters in our mailing lists because they are linked
>> by the theme but subjects of them weren't so clear on theme.
>> Alexis López Zubieta has written on Thursday, 25 April, at 12:01:
>> >I would like to clarify that the reason of this thread is not to fork
>> >LXDE or Razor-qt instead we are inviting you and the Razor-qt community
>> >to join us in order to make a better product. Both of you are making a
>> >lightweight desktop environment (now on LW DE) for those that need it.
>> >I live in Cuba a third world country, as such we can't buy every year
>> >the last computer model for our schools, business and homes so we have
>> >to use what we have at maximum, thats why we (the Nova Project) are
>> >interested in developing a LW DE. We have many users with Pentium III at
>> >700 MHz with 128 MB of RAM those are our stakeholders (the people who is
>> >going to use our product). But we have another limitation most of you
>> >have an advanced knowledge of computing, those people has none, so all
>> >the basic functionalities must be a simple thing to do, we can't ask to
>> >such user to open a terminal. As you can see the task that we have isn't
>> >simple at all. And this situation is common in every third world
>> >country, those who has the major part of the world population. So what
>> >we do is important for a lot of people.
>> >That's why we are so interested in join forces with you and with
>> >Razor-Qt. I don't pretend that you to recode everything, my intention is
>> >to call you guys realize that you are no making an experimental project
>> >or a toy you are making critical systems (for the major part of the
>> >world). Thats why I invite you to review what you have done and what you
>> >can do now on, you also should think in what we can do working spited
>> >and what we can achieve together.
>> >Andrej N. Gritsenko, Julien Lavergne, PCMan and the rest that think in
>> >the integration of the different communities as an opportunity please
>> >step in and lets make a formal proposal to the communities, to state our
>> >points in a more compressible way. Can I count on you?
>> I believe our goals are similar. At least what I always wanted from
>> DE? It should be:
>> 1) lightweight: it should not be slow in any way on netbooks for example
>> 2) easy to use: I should do anything with just few keypresses (or mouse
>> clicks for those who loves to hug their rats:)
>> 3) comfortable: it should have some default settings to be nice for new
>> users without terminal tricks and in the same time let me change every
>> element of my desktop system if I am advanced user
>> 4) modular: I should have the possibility to construct my desktop from
>> some elements if I want that
>> Also I know that accessibility is really thing which is required and it
>> even more important than any bells and whistles because those people who
>> need accessibility are more dependent on those things than we are.
>> You stated above what are computers your people have so let it be the
>> requirements which we have to support, i.e. LW DE should work fine on
>> them. I believe that is possible - my main desktop was 450 MHz Celeron
>> with 128 MB RAM just 4 years ago and it worked fine with KDE 3.5. It
>> started non momentally of course but I was able to watch movies, surf
>> internet with Firefox, edit documents, etc. I don't see any reason that
>> shouldn't be possible today.
>> And in other letter, Petr Vaněk has written on Thursday, 25 April, at
>> >hi all,
>> >I'm one of Razor committers.
>> >On 4/24/13 10:59 PM, Andrej N. Gritsenko wrote:
>> >> This would be just wonderful to have you joining forces. I've started
>> the thread with idea to join
>> >forces with razor-qt team. In case someone doesn't know, I'm the main
>> >developer of libfm and pcmanfm at the time being, mainly because PCMan
>> >has a lot less time and I have much more and I have interest in making
>> >it. Yes, I'm working with GTK but last time we found out that making it
>> >compatible with such fast changing GTK3 doesn't worth all the efforts.
>> >Therefore Qt looks like as viable alternative for another toolkit
>> >instead of GTK3 and PCMan started his experiments with Qt and it is what
>> >libfm-qt / pcmanfm-qt are. Yes, I can handle all bugs and feature
>> >requests for libfm / pcmanfm alone, but what with another LXDE
>> >components? LXDE team has very few developers. But since razor-qt has
>> >not too many developers too and they have the same goals (not build
>> >monstrous integrated complex but rather a desktop toolkit) I think it
>> >would be beneficial for both teams to join forces. And since you want
>> >something alike, that sound very promicing. But we should get razor-qt
>> >voices first I believe. From LXDE side - I and PCMan support the idea,
>> >some other developers aren't sure yet. Andriy.
>> >The idea is great for sure. For me, personally, is the Qt way to go
>> >because of its "ease of development" style for applications. I can
>> >compare it briefly myself as my patches probably live in Evolution (Gtk
>> >mail client) and it was quite hard core school of GUI programming ;)
>> >Since then I live with Qt as mi choice.
>> I still write libfm, libfm-gtk, and pcmanfm with glib and gtk base. I
>> given up the GTK3 support due to reasons I mentioned before - there is
>> still support for GTK3 up to 3.4 but I hardly will even try to adapt it
>> to newer versions, even if users will ask me. But I belive GTK2 support
>> is something we still have to have. At least because some old systems may
>> (and will) work easier with gtk2. And also because some users may don't
>> wish to install Qt just because they use exclusively Gtk applications
>> >I'd like to hear your ideas of cooperation/integration for sure.
>> As I already said, together people may do much more than splitted.
>> Since we decided to give up GTK3 support, we want to have lightweight DE
>> based on two toolkits - GTK2 for old or small systems (Debian Squeeze on
>> Celeron II, Raspberry Pi, etc., etc.) and Qt for more modern systems to
>> allow more flexibility. I do not ask Razor people to start develop GTK
>> applications and don't ask LXDE people to start develop Qt applications
>> but everyone can help others such way GTK version will get features it
>> misses now and Qt version will get features it misses. Everyone in both
>> camps have own zone of knowledge and working together may make it better.
>> Of course, everyone will more or less get new knowledge but I don't see
>> anything bad in that.
>> >I'm little bit afraid of one thing in potential merging. I think it
>> >would be more "philosophical" clash of users than real usage affects.
>> >Current LXDE users might raise their voice with: "down with Qt, we want
>> >Gtk" because they don't understand (and they don't need to understand of
>> >course) the easiness of development etc. It can be quite hazard for name
>> >of LXDE.
>> It's what I want - just don't give up Gtk, at least until it will be
>> abandoned by their creators and major distros. I.e. we have LXDE which is
>> GTK2 based and Razor-Qt which is Qt based, but both have near the same
>> number of similar feature components (they are different for now but will
>> be closer and closer with time). Only developers will know those DE are
>> close one to other, users will see Gtk one and Qt one so no concerns are
>> >On the other side I don't see any point against the move.
>> >Here are some unordered thoughts about Qt world of Razor:
>> >- Currently we are using Qt4 with initial preparation for switch to
>> >Qt5 (which would be quite easy).
>> >- With Qt5 the Qt libraries are even more modularized tan in Qt4.
>> >- KDE guys are working on so called "frameworks" = KDE technologies
>> >and libraries split to *independent* modules mostly (where possible)
>> >integrated into Qt itself.
>> > - the independency should be real, meaning - no cross dependencies
>> >between frameworks and also no global packages in distributions
>> > - which means we could use eg. Solid (hardware info framework -
>> >batteries, automounting, ...) in Razor instead our own backends because
>> >Solid is much more tested and it works on almost all platforms while we
>> >are stuck in udisk/udisk2 only.
>> Many Qt applications still use GIO so why not use gvfs then? And some
>> things may be done via libfm which also uses gio/gvfs. When I prepared
>> release 1.0.0 I get rid of every memory leak so it should be memory safe
>> for now, valgrind finds no problems so far.
>> Anyway, I'm not going to learn more Qt in nearest future because I
>> have to bring libfm and pcmanfm to 1.2-beta state (there are huge number
>> of features to implement for 1.2 series, I want to clear FR tracker as
>> much as possible).
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "Razor-qt" group.
>> For more options, visit this group at
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Razor-qt" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to razor-qt+unsubscribe@....
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Razor-qt" group.
> For more options, visit this group at
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Razor-qt" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to razor-qt+unsubscribe@....
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.