22 Dec
2009
22 Dec
'09
1:31 a.m.
On Mon Dec 21 19:05 , david sent:
Robert Jonsson wrote:
Don't rush it. Just keep in mind that there's stuff in Qt4 that doesn't
work that works fine in Qt3, too.
--
TMany that use MusE regularly are more concerned about jackmidi and other
features that bring new functionality or interoperability. From my understanding
QT4 is more of a cosmetic update and wouldn't necessarily bring more sequencer
functionality in. (correct me if I'm wrong) However migrating could require a
major overhaul....
Robert and Tim have put in a hell of a lot of work in the past year or so and
MusE is functioning really really well. It may look a bit dated.. but that's
really not the point is it?
One
suggestion (but it may be too big a deal as the KDE folks found out!), go
to the more up to date QT4.
There are no immediate plans to move, Qt3 should be around in distros
yet for a few years. But eventually we will move. Not the least,
there's stuff in Qt4 that would be nice to use. :) 
22 Dec
22 Dec
2:01 a.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
sonofzev(a)iinet.net.au wrote:
On Mon Dec 21 19:05 , david sent:
I'm no fan of eye candy, and that's what I think 90% of the Qt4-based
KDE4 *is*. I'd rather have my music computer's processor and memory
being used for audio than eye candy. ;-)
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
Robert Jonsson wrote:
Don't rush it. Just
keep in mind that there's stuff in Qt4 that doesn't
work that works fine in Qt3, too.
--
TMany that use MusE regularly are more concerned about jackmidi and other
features that bring new functionality or interoperability. From my understanding
QT4 is more of a cosmetic update and wouldn't necessarily bring more sequencer
functionality in. (correct me if I'm wrong) However migrating could require a
major overhaul....
Robert and Tim have put in a hell of a lot of work in the past year or so and
MusE is functioning really really well. It may look a bit dated.. but that's
really not the point is it? One
suggestion (but it may be too big a deal as the KDE folks found out!), go
to the more up to date QT4.
There are no immediate plans to move, Qt3 should be
around in distros
yet for a few years. But eventually we will move. Not the least,
there's stuff in Qt4 that would be nice to use. :) 
6 a.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 07:01:14 david wrote:
sonofzev(a)iinet.net.au wrote:
KDE4 != Qt4
KDE just makes good use of Qt for eye-candy. But other projects make good use
of Qt for very serious non-gui stuff too.
Porting to Qt4 is a lot of work. But lets be honest, its a work that should
have been done years ago. Qt3 is out of support for several years now, why
anybody still writes apps with it is kind of out of my reach.
I know free projects are notoriously short of man-power. But the more you wait
for that porting, the harder it is to find people still knowing about the steps
needed to port. So the longer you wait, the less people you can ask (for free)
about helping you...
And switching to Qt4 is really worth it! Lots more platform-independent basic
stuff with lots cleaner api. And lots nicer gui stuff:-)
Arnold
On Mon Dec 21 19:05 , david sent:
I'm no fan of eye candy, and that's what I think 90% of the Qt4-based
KDE4 *is*. I'd rather have my music computer's processor and memory
being used for audio than eye candy. ;-) Robert Jonsson wrote:
TMany that use MusE regularly are more concerned about jackmidi and other
features that bring new functionality or interoperability. From my
understanding QT4 is more of a cosmetic update and wouldn't necessarily
bring more sequencer functionality in. (correct me if I'm wrong) However
migrating could require a major overhaul....
Robert and Tim have put in a hell of a lot of work in the past year or so
and MusE is functioning really really well. It may look a bit dated..
but that's really not the point is it? > One suggestion (but it may be too big a deal
as the KDE folks found
> out!), go to the more up to date QT4.
There are no immediate plans to move, Qt3 should be around in distros
yet for a few years. But eventually we will move. Not the least,
there's stuff in Qt4 that would be nice to use. :)
Don't rush it. Just keep in mind that there's stuff in Qt4 that doesn't
work that works fine in Qt3, too.
3:50 p.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
Arnold Krille wrote:
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 07:01:14 david wrote:
Never said it was. But Qt4 isn't there yet for some very serious non-gui
stuff - like printing.
sonofzev(a)iinet.net.au wrote:
KDE4 != Qt4 On Mon Dec 21 19:05 , david sent:
I'm no fan of eye candy, and
that's what I think 90% of the Qt4-based
KDE4 *is*. I'd rather have my music computer's processor and memory
being used for audio than eye candy. ;-) Robert Jonsson wrote:
>> One suggestion (but it may be too big a deal as the KDE folks found
>> out!), go to the more up to date QT4.
> There are no immediate plans to move, Qt3 should be around in distros
> yet for a few years. But eventually we will move. Not the least,
> there's stuff in Qt4 that would be nice to use. :)
Don't rush it. Just keep in mind that there's stuff in Qt4 that doesn't
work that works fine in Qt3, too.
TMany that use MusE regularly are more concerned
about jackmidi and other
features that bring new functionality or interoperability. From my
understanding QT4 is more of a cosmetic update and wouldn't necessarily
bring more sequencer functionality in. (correct me if I'm wrong) However
migrating could require a major overhaul....
Robert and Tim have put in a hell of a lot of work in the past year or so
and MusE is functioning really really well. It may look a bit dated..
but that's really not the point is it? KDE just makes good use of Qt for eye-candy. But other
projects make good use
of Qt for very serious non-gui stuff too.
Porting to Qt4 is a lot of work. But lets be honest, its a work that should
have been done years ago. Qt3 is out of support for several years now, why
anybody still writes apps with it is kind of out of my reach.
I know free projects are notoriously short of man-power. But the more you wait
for that porting, the harder it is to find people still knowing about the steps
needed to port. So the longer you wait, the less people you can ask (for free)
about helping you...
Yah. And programmer egos get stroked more by doing something kewl on the
screen than by doing something that makes a program *better*.
And switching to Qt4 is really worth it! Lots more
platform-independent basic
stuff with lots cleaner api. And lots nicer gui stuff:-)
Eye candy.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
4:28 p.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 20:50:55 david wrote:
Arnold Krille wrote:
If you call the semaphores, threads, threadpools, runners etc of Qt4 "eye
candy" I guess we have to agree to disagree...
Arnold
And switching to Qt4 is really worth it! Lots
more platform-independent
basic stuff with lots cleaner api. And lots nicer gui stuff:-)
Eye candy.
23 Dec
23 Dec
3:27 a.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
Arnold Krille wrote:
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 20:50:55 david wrote:
I was referring to the "lots of nicer gui stuff."
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
Arnold Krille wrote:
If you call the semaphores, threads, threadpools, runners etc of Qt4 "eye
candy" I guess we have to agree to disagree... And switching to Qt4 is really worth it! Lots
more platform-independent
basic stuff with lots cleaner api. And lots nicer gui stuff:-)
Eye candy. 
22 Dec
22 Dec
5:52 p.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
david schrieb:
1: as Arnold, who knows a good deal about, has stated before: QT4 may
(godforbid, the end is nigh!!!) look more "modern" "cute" or
whatever.
But it comes with lots of improvements on a lower level also.
2: If a GUI looks crummy and oldish but works OK, I prefer it over a
sweet looking one, that does not work OK. But I do not see where the
problem with QT4 may be. If I look at Qtractor or Traverso I cannot find
any problems that seem related to its GUI-Toolkit. OK, they look a bit
smoother and more say... polished as their QT3-brothers but not
everybody would call this a problem....
I am not that enthusiastic also about the extra-efforts of switching,
that lags the development of apps like Rosegarden but I think, it is
indeed neccessary to stay up to date in the evolution of GNU...
Arnold Krille wrote:
I do not think, that such behaviour is related to the question whether
to switch to a recent version/generation of a toolkit or not. Like it or
not: if you stick with a toolkit, that is effectively abandoned by its
makers, you are programming a dinosaur.
Those, who dislike the way QT is evolving, are welcome to fork QT3, call
it FreeCuteClassic or whatever camel-case-name they like and maintain it
forever.
But I do not see such efforts being made and thus any QT3-app is
effectively outdated.
I know free projects are notoriously short of
man-power. But the more you wait
for that porting, the harder it is to find people still knowing about the steps
needed to port. So the longer you wait, the less people you can ask (for free)
about helping you...
Yah. And programmer egos get stroked more by doing something kewl on the
screen than by doing something that makes a program *better*. And switching
to Qt4 is really worth it! Lots more platform-independent basic
stuff with lots cleaner api. And lots nicer gui stuff:-)
Eye candy.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAksxP5QACgkQ1Aecwva1SWO6xQCfVb+l71+FOocNemUDfBjSyfTr
rqwAn3YU4uRuDWEYBUhAAeYVKORUQMOh
=TwZn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
7:04 a.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009, sonofzev(a)iinet.net.au wrote:
TMany that use MusE regularly are more concerned about
jackmidi and
other features that bring new functionality or interoperability. From
my understanding QT4 is more of a cosmetic update and wouldn't
necessarily bring more sequencer functionality in. (correct me if I'm
wrong) However migrating could require a major overhaul....
Robert and Tim have put in a hell of a lot of work in the past year or
so and MusE is functioning really really well. It may look a bit
dated.. but that's really not the point is it?
Actually, I'm kind of dreading KDE/QT 4, because nothing I've seen or
heard of it has impressed me. As for looking dated, these days, usually
that seems to be defined by most people as not looking like a recent
version of Windows, which also isn't something I really aspire to with
my desktop anyway.
I think I'd agree with everything you've said -- if MusE (or any app)
decided to stay on QT3 for longer, it wouldn't break my heart at all!
--
+ Brent A. Busby + "We've all heard that a million monkeys
+ UNIX Systems Admin + banging on a million typewriters will
+ University of Chicago + eventually reproduce the entire works of
+ Physical Sciences Div. + Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet,
+ James Franck Institute + we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky
3:45 p.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
Brent Busby wrote:
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009, sonofzev(a)iinet.net.au wrote:
A friend of mine who is busy trying to push me into using KDE4 says "It
has more eye candy than Windows!" as if that is something wonderful!
I also understand that Qt4 is supposed to be completely cross-platform
now, so KDE will be able to run KDE4 on Windows.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
TMany that use MusE regularly are more concerned
about jackmidi and
other features that bring new functionality or interoperability. From
my understanding QT4 is more of a cosmetic update and wouldn't
necessarily bring more sequencer functionality in. (correct me if I'm
wrong) However migrating could require a major overhaul....
Robert and Tim have put in a hell of a lot of work in the past year or
so and MusE is functioning really really well. It may look a bit
dated.. but that's really not the point is it?
Actually, I'm kind of dreading KDE/QT 4, because nothing I've seen or
heard of it has impressed me. As for looking dated, these days, usually
that seems to be defined by most people as not looking like a recent
version of Windows, which also isn't something I really aspire to with
my desktop anyway.
I think I'd agree with everything you've said -- if MusE (or any app)
decided to stay on QT3 for longer, it wouldn't break my heart at all!
4:28 p.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 20:45:54 david wrote:
A friend of mine who is busy trying to push me into
using KDE4 says "It
has more eye candy than Windows!" as if that is something wonderful!
Windows 7 has several "new" things KDE (and probably mac) have since years.
I also understand that Qt4 is supposed to be
completely cross-platform
now, so KDE will be able to run KDE4 on Windows.
Please google for "KDE on windows"...
Arnold
23 Dec
23 Dec
3:29 a.m.
New subject: [ANN] MusE 1.0
Arnold Krille wrote:
Yup. What a waste of effort.
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
On Tuesday 22 December 2009 20:45:54 david wrote:
It's still too much eye candy.
A friend of mine who is busy trying to push me
into using KDE4 says "It
has more eye candy than Windows!" as if that is something wonderful!
Windows 7 has several "new" things KDE (and probably mac) have since years.
I also
understand that Qt4 is supposed to be completely cross-platform
now, so KDE will be able to run KDE4 on Windows.
Please google for "KDE on windows"...
5493
days inactive
5494
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
10 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Arnold Krille -
Brent Busby -
david -
Hartmut Noack -
sonofzev＠iinet.net.au