Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 2nd Apr 2009 16:12 UTC, submitted by Rahul
Gnome Only a few days ago, we ran an article on the future of KDE and GNOME, and which of the two had the brighter future based on their developmental processes. Barely has that discussion ended, or the GNOME engineering team comes with a pretty daunting plan to introduce a fairly massive reworking of the GNOME interface for GNOME 3.0 (2.30). Read on for the details.
Thread beginning with comment 356559
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: you know what sucks?
by KAMiKAZOW on Thu 2nd Apr 2009 23:53 UTC in reply to "RE: you know what sucks?"
KAMiKAZOW
Member since:
2005-07-06

You are missing one vital point of why Qt simply isn't an option for GNOME, and it probably never will be.

Qt != Gtk+.

As simple as that. GNOME is a Gtk+ environment, and it will most likely always be.

Whoa, go back to the last millenium. KDE vs. GNOME is no longer about Qt vs. GTK. The last toolkit barrier fell with Qt 4.5 (GTK style included by default and license change to LGPL).
These days it's mainly about the usability philosophy since GNOME 2.x.
No developer seriously says that GNOME should drop GTK alltogether. However it's absolute perfectly possible to create 100% GNOME HIG conforming applications with Qt. Qt itself is rather small (at least by today's standards). So there's probably no technical reason to not use Qt here and there in GNOME.

There are people who say that GNOME should adopt Plasma. This case it a bit more complicated. It really depends on how much KDE code is really required for Plasma. When many KDE libraries have to be loaded into memory then memory footprint is a technical reason not to use Plasma by default.
Luckily, on an individual level it doesn't matter, because it is possible to use Plasma under GNOME. Thanks to common back-end standards used by both projects, clicking on the Plasma Log-Out buttons brings up the GNOME Log-Out window.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: you know what sucks?
by darknexus on Fri 3rd Apr 2009 00:03 in reply to "RE[2]: you know what sucks?"
darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

However it's absolute perfectly possible to create 100% GNOME HIG conforming applications with Qt.

Perhaps conforming to most of the HIG, however one philosophy of GNOME is in regards to accessibility, and assistive technologies. At the moment, QT is not an option for this reason if no other, due to the lack of integration with at-spi. This is eventually going to be fixed, with the at-spi-dbus project aiming for useability by the end of the year, but for now any QT application would not be considered a GNOME application on those grounds alone. It's not just about the HIG, it's about integration, and as long as QT doesn't integrate with all of GNOME's core technologies no QT application would ever be considered for GNOME. As at-spi and the relevant assistive software is considered a core GNOME technology, this effectively bars QT apps. NOt trying to put down QT, just laying out the facts.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: you know what sucks?
by superstoned on Fri 3rd Apr 2009 11:03 in reply to "RE[3]: you know what sucks?"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

You sure have a point. However, investing in fixing this in Qt would be far more efficient than fixing everything else lacking in GTK2+.

I think it is time to start integrating Qt and GTK2+ more closely.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: you know what sucks?
by abraxas on Sat 4th Apr 2009 16:23 in reply to "RE[2]: you know what sucks?"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

Whoa, go back to the last millenium. KDE vs. GNOME is no longer about Qt vs. GTK. The last toolkit barrier fell with Qt 4.5 (GTK style included by default and license change to LGPL).
These days it's mainly about the usability philosophy since GNOME 2.x.
No developer seriously says that GNOME should drop GTK alltogether. However it's absolute perfectly possible to create 100% GNOME HIG conforming applications with Qt. Qt itself is rather small (at least by today's standards). So there's probably no technical reason to not use Qt here and there in GNOME.


You're glossing over a lot. It's not just about whether you can create HIG compliant applications with QT. QT does a hell of a lot more than GTK. GNOME relies on several external libraries that do essentially the same thing as parts of QT. Take Cairo for example. What do you do with an application that depends on Cairo? Do you eliminate the Cairo dependency and integrate it with QT or do you leave Cairo and end up with a lot of extra and uneeded libs that only complicate things when someone decides to make a new app that doesn't use Cairo but uses QT directly instead. If you ditch Cairo and other libs like it you end up rewriting GNOME from scratch. That doesn't seem very helpful either. Ditching GNOME's GObject system for a more C++ compatible object system would also probably be necessary and make the task even more arduous.

Reply Parent Score: 2