Re: [Rosegarden-devel] ok with this ? (Re: Vote on my next project)

[D. M. M. <mic...@ro...>]

On Sunday 25 November 2007, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> 5) Help me port RG to Qt4 (but *not* KDE4)

I was afraid something like that was coming.  We use KDE features all *over* 
the place, and this sounds incredibly ugly.

OTOH, every other serious application in our niche is already cross-platform, 
and pure QT.  QT offers portability that KDE doesn't.

I'm also easy to persuade that we want to do something like Hydrogen (or 
Ardour), and impose our own look and feel that ignores user preferences, and 
just always looks like itself, no matter where it is.

We need to work around the dependencies on ALSA and JACK too, if this is to be 
viable.

It all sounds waaaaaaaaaaaaaay the hell over my head though, I have to tell 
you, but I can see advantages to going that route.  Hell, it gives me 
flexibility too if I ever decide to abandon the Linux ship like you.  Nobody 
who reads me regularly would think that I am totally happy here.

So what next, and what do we want to do with this QT4 port?  The same thing, 
or something a little different?

Is this a fork, or a port?  One problem I could see there is that you and I 
are diametrically opposed on the simplification issue.  You'd like it more 
Mac-like with three choices and one button, and that would piss me off fast.  
I see a number of problems with the organic way Rosegarden has accumulated 
features, but everything we have is useful to somebody, and can't be 
duplicated by any other feature.

-- 
D. Michael McIntyre