| 1 |
On Tue, July 28, 2009 09:29, Hanno Böck wrote: |
| 2 |
> While I fully understand that people want to deprecate "old cruft", I |
| 3 |
> assume this is far too early. (just think back how long it took us to |
| 4 |
> deprecate gtk+-1) |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I fully agree with this thought. The qt4 world is simply nowhere near |
| 7 |
as complete and usable (nor stable either, which is worse) as the qt3 |
| 8 |
one is. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> I'm still on kde 3 and my previous three attemps to switch to kde 4 all |
| 11 |
> ended up in the conclusion that kde 4 is far from being stable yet. It has |
| 12 |
> tons of regressions. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
kde4 is just unusable for serious world. Magnificent work, yes, and some |
| 15 |
programs can be used without too much problem. But kde4 as a whole just |
| 16 |
can't be still compared to kde3.x |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> The amount of qt3 apps not having a sane or just no qt4 port yet is |
| 19 |
> probably enormous. I also maintain such packages. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
There's absolutely no match at all in the linux world for k3b, and |
| 22 |
whomever has used the qt4 port will agree that's it's unstable and |
| 23 |
very far in which regards features to the qt3 version. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
There are lots of qt3 apps that have no equivalent for qt4. I happen |
| 26 |
to like kaffeine, I am pretty sure that everyone else can name a couple |
| 27 |
of other examples. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Being that said, of course, there's no way that we can impose devs and |
| 30 |
maintainers which to support. It's their choice. All I say is that, to |
| 31 |
me, this deserves a much dedicated and deep thought. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
The qt3 stuff is stable, this is not another xmms-like thing, it works, |
| 34 |
and it doesn't only work, but today it works *far better* than the qt4 |
| 35 |
newer alternatives, in most cases anyway. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Jesús Guerrero |
Archives