QtMoko and FSO (was: qtmoko v33)
gb at bsdmn.com
Wed Mar 9 20:48:28 CET 2011
I hope there is still some chances that Radek will change his dicision.
From my point of view where is no real need in FSO/qt gibrid, because of
1. qt stack has richer functionalily, better performance, and less bugs
than that FSO dbus/vala thing (don't throw rotten tomatoes to me plese)
2. qt has it's own resource management, FSO - it's own, rewriting qt one
to FSO one is worthless effort
3. where logs of significantly more useful, easier and non-destructive
goals to rich, i can suggest few:
3.1 switch back to X11. with new graphical subsystem performance this
will work great.
3.2 switch to newer qt versions
3.3 fix 100500 bugs left
3.4 add gta04 support <- most important
3.5 improve performance and usability
3.6 implement new features, like: 'geek' theme, sliding buttons in
^^^ IMO this set can keep everyone busy for a while.
where is also no real benefit visible from switching to FSO. qtmoko will
become more complicated, more buggy, slower, harder to develop :(
I afraid i'll have to stay on non-FSO version forether. And certain,
this planned change worth more discussion. If someone wants FSO, better
to install it on debian or with SHR.
В Втр, 08/03/2011 в 18:00 +0100, Radek Polak пишет:
> Dmitry Chistikov wrote:
> > I'm afraid it's too early to ask, but could you give an estimate on how
> > much time it'll take to enable the use of FSO framework? Just something
> > like "about a year" or, say, "not less than four months".
> Writing simple dialer application could be matter of days/hours. Integrating
> all the functions so that it looks like qtmoko now will be much more difficult
> (i cant even guess how much). We also need FSO running on debian - i'd prefer
> current git version. I am not aware if there are debian packages for recent
> FSO. Anyone knows?
> Openmoko community mailing list
> community at lists.openmoko.org
More information about the community