Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 4th Oct 2007 15:34 UTC, submitted by te_lanus
SuSE, openSUSE OpenSUSE 10.3 has been released today. "This version contains new beautiful green artwork, KDE 3.5.7 and parts of KDE 4, SUSE-polished GNOME 2.20, a GTK version of YaST, a new 1-click-install technology, MP3 support out-of-the-box, new and redesigned YaST modules, compiz and compiz fusion advances, virtualisation improvements, OpenOffice.org 2.3, Xfce 4.4.1, and much more!"
Thread beginning with comment 276333
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: GTK YAST
by segedunum on Fri 5th Oct 2007 13:16 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: GTK YAST"
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

The look of GTK YaST is in tune with the gnome control centre, same layout and consistent. Why should GNOME users have to put up with the Qt/crystal icons inconsistency that was YaST before?

Because we have people putting effort into integrative stuff like this:

http://gtk-qt.ecs.soton.ac.uk/

It is more than capable of going both ways, from GTK to Qt (KDE) and Qt (KDE) to GTK. There is no reason whatsoever, especially considering that YaST is a bunch of modules that can be embedded and launched, for someone to completely reimplement a front-end in a completely different GUI toolkit because they believe things like styles, themes and icons to be unchangeable. It's not as if GTK is offering you something that Qt can't do here, and the only reason it has been done is because of looks, which is pretty damn silly. Take a look at these applications, which use GTK, integrated nicely into KDE:

http://gtk-qt.ecs.soton.ac.uk/images/screenshots/gimppolyester-thum...
http://gtk-qt.ecs.soton.ac.uk/images/screenshots/firefoxdomino-thum...
http://gtk-qt.ecs.soton.ac.uk/screenshots.php?eclipseserenity

Eclipse isn't going to be ported specifically to Qt and KDE any time soon, but this suffices quite nicely really. I fail to see why this can't be done in the opposite direction.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: GTK YAST
by joeca on Fri 5th Oct 2007 13:24 in reply to "RE[4]: GTK YAST"
joeca Member since:
2007-09-06

and the only reason it has been done is because of looks, which is pretty damn silly.

Non-geeks tend to like uniformity and nice looks. I like them as well so i guess that makes me neither X nor Y but a Z factor?

If linux will ever get a userbase outside of geekdom, nice looks are required.. Also even with said implementation above, the app's still do not *feel* right to me outside of their native environment.

Edited 2007-10-05 13:27

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: GTK YAST
by Hiev on Fri 5th Oct 2007 13:26 in reply to "RE[4]: GTK YAST"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

As I remember you trolled that it would take years to make a GTK front end for YAST, and look, it only took some months, but of course, don't let that stop you in your anti-gtk quest.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: GTK YAST
by Morty on Fri 5th Oct 2007 18:42 in reply to "RE[5]: GTK YAST"
Morty Member since:
2005-07-06

it only took some months

That's verifiable not correct, as it was part of Google's Summer of Code 2006(and it was started before that:-). Even if it has got 1:1 functionality coverage of YaST already, it took more than some months.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: GTK YAST
by segedunum on Sat 6th Oct 2007 01:22 in reply to "RE[5]: GTK YAST"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

As I remember you trolled that it would take years to make a GTK front end for YAST...

Nope don't recall making that comment. I do remember saying that it was pointless though. But then again, it's easy to role out the troll word.

and look, it only took some months

It took more than a few months, and if you actually have a look at it:

http://news.opensuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/gtk-yast-blueto...

They are basically exact reproductions of the Qt YaST modules, except written with GTK. So what exactly were they doing here that was different?

...don't let that stop you in your anti-gtk quest.

Ahhhhhh. I know this is a tender area to broach with some people, but I'm sorry sweetheart, I just don't believe that re-writing applications in another toolkit is a good idea.

I mean, why bother porting GTK to Windows and the Mac when you can just rewrite the GIMP's front-end in Cocoa and Windows.Forms? But of course, that would be silly, wouldn't it? ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 1