[bt-devel] proposal

[Joachim Ansorg]

Hi!

> > Don't forget: I do not have windows and I''m not so rich to spend 700DM
> > for a buggy OS if I can get a better one for 80DM. I coded for Windows in
> > Delphi years ago, and Qt is much better.
>
> This is not the problem, I would send you a 95 license.

Ok, one problem killed ;-)

> > > > If we'd switch toQt we have to change these things:
> > > > 	-Drop XML stuff
> > >
> > > I don't mind.
> >
> > But it's really useful and easy to use.
>
> After the keychooser is finished, we would have to drop the xml for the
> presenters anyway. (Not sure)

No, we won't have to (we can create a new KAtion derived class (see out other 
KAction classes in BibleTime )).

> > > > 	-Install dialog will be very hard because we'd have to write our own
> > > > network management code
> > >
> > > Let us make a separate application of this. Wouldn't be so bad if it
> > > were linux-only. Maybe we can port it later...

I forgot that Qt offers some network code we can use. Maybe it's possible 
with Qt's stuff.

> > > > 	-Integration in KDE is lost
> > >
> > > Up to this point it does not hurt. We don't use dcop and kparts yet,
> > > and there would be other ways to do the things that need to be done...
> > >
> > > > 	-Lots of small things will go (i18n(), SmallIocn(), LargeIcon(), ...
> > > > , klistview, the KPopupMenu, )
> > >
> > > i18n() would be a seroius problem. Is it not available on windows? Is
> > > it not a GNU thing?
> >
> > Qt does use tr(), but I'm so familair with KDE.

I mean I'm not familair with Qt ;-)

> Ok, accepted.
>
> > > The icons could be compiled into the binary.
> >
> > Nooo! The binary would be megs to huge if we do this! If we'd do it we
> > have to port some KDE code.
>
> We could write a simple backend for images.

Yes, some thing like KDE's stuff.

> > > Klistview -> Qlistview, IMO easy.
> > > same for QPopupMenu
> > >
> > > > 	-We have to change all the dialogs (almost all use KDialogBase and
> > > > KDE widgets)
> > >
> > > Takes time, but is possible and not too hard. The optionsdialog might
> > > be difficult...
> >
> > Maybe port some KDE sources?
>
> Maybe. Maybe just use QT (designer?) for a static layout...

I mean port KDE sources so porting of BibleTime itself is easier (e.g. 
KDialogBse and KJanusWidget).

> > > > 	-Port KDE partly, at least the widgets we need to Qt and Windows
> > >
> > > Which? KTextEdit?
> > > Why not port KConfig?
> >
> > Sure, we'd have to port KConfig, don't know about KTextEdit.
>
> I guess we couldn't port KTextEdit even if we wanted to...

In Qt 3 there will be a QTextEdit, AFAIK KTextEdit is the pre-version of 
QTextEdit (same author).

> > > > Somebody would have to buy Qt and a compiler ...
> > >
> > > Exactly. I think Inprise offers a free compiler, and we don't need an
> > > IDE.
> >
> > We could use KDevelop and compile in windows or vmware.
>
> VMware? Isn't it expensive? Win is ok.

Ok.

> > BTW, KAction things will be lost if we are Qt only!

> What about QAction? Btw, IMO QT will use more and more things from KDE in
> future.

Hm, maybe we can use QAction. We have to look at it.
But let's finish 1.0 as soon as possible.

Now, some major points we have to solve before we can port:
	-We need Qt for Windows. The enterprise edition we need costs abou $1900 for 
each developer! Where do we get so much money? Maybe we can find a company 
which wants to spnsor use. The money is not so much for them. But which 
company could be interested in BibleTime?
Companies do spnsor KDevelop because they use it. But BibleTime is a 
completely other type of application. For companies like the german bible 
society we are opponents because if we are plattform indepenant they'll loose 
some market share.
Ideas who wants to sponsor us?

--Joachim