Re: [Rosegarden-devel] [Rosegarden-bugs] SF.net SVN: rosegarden:[10791] trunk/rosegarden/src/base/Studio.cpp

[Heikki J. J. <hj...@gm...>]

2009/8/30 Julie S <msj...@ya...>

> Dear Heikki,
>
> from your last commit:
> > Log Message:
> > -----------
> > Function size() returns size_t when std::vector is used.
> >
> > I am thinking what would happe in std::vector would be
> > replaced with QVector,
> > and std::string with QString? Their size() function return
> > int, and then
> > there would be less to think about unsigned int vs. signed
> > conversions.
>
> Everytime, I talk of moving a Qt class to base, it spurs a discussion about
> the long standing tradition of keeping base toolkit free.  That is why we
> have some classes that act as liaisons in the misc/ directory.  They handle
> the dirty work of talking to base in its language.
>

There are currently three lisences for Qt 4.5: Commercial, GNU LGPL v. 2.1
and, GNU GPL v. 3.0

http://qt.nokia.com/products/licensing


> Without Chris around to weigh in on it, I suggest we hold off.  I don't
> think he is outright opposed to it.  Maybe if enough of these instances
> appear, then there could be a strong case made to push QString, and QVector,
> etc to base.
>

I was thinking this purely for technical reasons. Chris expressed his
preference to use purely int types and I was trying to figure out what that
would mean in coding.


>
> Historically, these talks end in leaving base alone.
>
> Not to shut the discussion down, but just to say, we've been there before
> and this is what happened.
>

The licensing of Qt has been changing with time, therefore the "free"
argument could be reconsidered now that GPL lisencing is available.


>
> I'm not taking sides just asking the decision to wait until Chris
> resurfaces.


Chris is the person who makes the technical decision. I am the person who
generates
sparkles, but Chris is the person who has the fuel and who desides when to
light the fire.

-- 

Heikki