QtMoko and FSO (was: qtmoko v33)

Bernhard Reiter ockham at raz.or.at
Fri Mar 11 21:38:09 CET 2011


+1.
I've only recently switched from SHR to qtmoko (v31) and I'm impressed
with performance and maturity of applications. I really wouldn't like to
lose that again.

Regards
Bernhard

Am Donnerstag, den 10.03.2011, 12:00 +0100 schrieb
community-request at lists.openmoko.org:
>                                   Von: 
>         Gennady Kupava <gb at bsdmn.com>
>                              Reply-to: 
>         List for Openmoko community
>         discussion
>         <community at lists.openmoko.org>
>                                    An: 
>         List for Openmoko community
>         discussion
>         <community at lists.openmoko.org>
>                               Betreff: 
>         Re: QtMoko and FSO (was: qtmoko
>         v33)
>                                 Datum: 
>         Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:48:28 +0300
>         (2011-03-09 20:48:28)
>         
>         
>         Hi,
>         
>         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
>         following reasons:
>         
>         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
>         answer screen
>         
>         ^^^ 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.
>         
>         Gennady.
>         
>         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?
>         > 
>         > Regards
>         > 
>         > Radek
>         > 
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Openmoko community mailing list
>         > community at lists.openmoko.org
>         > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
> 




More information about the community mailing list