Re: [Passwordsafe-linux] PasswordSafe's Windows UI frameworks

[Scott R. <sr...@fi...>]

My first thought is 'watever is going to make your life easiest in the
long run' - I suspect te Qt UI framework may be te answer there, but
am not certain.

My second thought echoes that of all the other replies you've gotten -
anything that makes the Linux version better / easier.  I'm using the
Windows version at work, the Linux version at home.

On Sat, Jul 06, 2019 at 01:17:55PM +0300, pwsafe.org wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm at a crossroad with regards to the Windows version of PasswordSafe, and
> would like to get input from the members of this list.
> 
> PasswordSafe's Windows UI is built directly upon MFC from the first
> releases. This means that over time, we've enhanced MFC's functionality by
> deriving classes from MFC with functionality "borrowed" from other sources.
> 
> Case in point: CPWToolbar is derived from the CToolBar MFC class, with code
> added to support the PasswordSafe graphics. Problem is, new display
> technology is poorly supported by CPWToolBar::CToolBar.
> 
> Micorsoft has replaced CToolBar with CMFCToolBar, which contains much of
> the new functionality that was previously hand-coded in CPWToolBar. The
> switch to CPWToolBar::CMFCToolBar, however, is non-trivial.
> 
> Also, the PasswordSafe Windows UI is getting a bit old, compared to today's
> programs, and could use a general facelift.
> 
> So now I'm considering three options:
> 1. Local fix: Move from CPWToolBar::CToolBar to CPWToolBar::CMFCToolBar
> 2. Switch to the wxWidgets UI for Windows as the shipping UI.
> 3. Switch to the Qt UI framework, which appears to be much more polished
> than wxWidgets, for Windows, and perhaps for Linux as well. The Qt Open
> Source License is GPL 2/3, but I think that this is compatible with the
> project's license (that is, I think a mixed license would work).
> 
> Thoughts, anyone?

-- 
Scott Raun
sr...@fi...