Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 2 Nov 2002 18:07:13 -0500 (EST) | From | Patrick Finnegan <> | Subject | Re: Kconfig (qt) -> Gconfig (gtk) |
| |
On 2 Nov 2002, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-11-02 at 21:57, Patrick Finnegan wrote: > > On 2 Nov 2002, Alan Cox wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 2002-11-02 at 20:36, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > > > Oh please.... > > > > Wouldn't it be more helpful to iron the (few) small glitches out of the > > > > qt based one than write a new one just because you don't happen to like > > > > the library? > > > > > > Lota of installations have gtk but don't have qt. > > > > And a lot of installations have QT but not GTK... This feels like a vi vs > > emacs discussion. > > It sort of is. The difference being its "do I send you a vi macro or an > emacs macro", and the obvious answer in this case being that if someone > wants go write both then we all win.
I'll go ahead and agree with you there. I just don't want to see one being scrapped in favor of the other.
Pat -- Purdue Universtiy ITAP/RCS Information Technology at Purdue Research Computing and Storage http://www-rcd.cc.purdue.edu
http://dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/archive/images/dilbert2040637020924.gif
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |