qreator-discuss team mailing list archive

[David Planella <david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Al 30/11/12 13:19, En/na Stefan Schwarzburg ha escrit:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 1:07 PM, David Planella
> <david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> 
>     Al 30/11/12 11:26, En/na Stefan Schwarzburg ha escrit:
>     > Hi David,
>     >
>     > thank you for your answer!
>     > I will not go into details again, but I think that in general we
>     agree :-)
>     >
> 
>     Cool :)
> 
>     > I have started the comparison table in the wiki, but you might
>     know more
>     > about i18n and localization.
>     >
> 
>     I saw that, thank you so much for doing the research and filling the
>     table in. That's exactly what I had in mind and more!
> 
>     Regarding i18n/l10n, I think we can get away with just having one row
>     for i18n (that is, if the toolkit has got good internationalization
>     support, we can assume it can be well localized).
> 
> 
> just a quick note to that: I guess that gettext support and e.g. RTL
> support in widgets is not the same. And I don't think kivy e.g. can do
> RTL...
>  

Hm, you're absolutely right, I oversaw that. The other aspect is font
support. And accessibility.

> 
>     I think except HTML5, all toolkits should support i18n. I've been
>     looking at kivy a bit, and if I understand it correctly, it's 100%
>     Python code and should support gettext as usual. The only part that I'm
>     not too clear on is whether the _() gettext call can be used in Kv, but
>     having asked on #kivy, they tell me that Kv files can contain Python
>     imports (e.g. #:from gettext import gettext as _) and Python calls (e.g.
>     _('translate me!')), so if that works out, then i18n is implicitly
>     supported.
> 
>     > My take on this is issue at the moment is, that I do not like Qt, but
>     > I'm happy to learn it, so that this feeling will then either be
>     based on
>     > in-depth knowledge or dissapear...
>     >
> 
>     That's the spirit :)
> 
>     > I think that I will use kivy for other projects.
>     >
> 
>     Yeah, Kivy looks really cool and nice to program with, especially with
>     its more pythonic interface. I'm still more inclined to use Qt, but as
>     you said, let's focus on separating logic and UI for now.
> 
>     Btw, regarding the Python 3 port, you'll be glad to hear that it's
>     happening: "Kivy got a $5000 grant from the Python Software Foundation
>     for porting it to Python 3.3" -
>     https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kivy-users/5Z_UJOoBeIc/discussion
>     :-)
> 
>     > Still, we have to plan in detail, which parts of the window will
>     be qml
>     > based, and which will be qwidgets based.
>     >
> 
>     I agree, I need to delve into Qt a bit more myself first.
> 
>     Thanks!
> 
>     Cheers,
>     David.
> 
>     > Cheers,
>     > Stefan
>     >
>     > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 4:46 PM, David Planella
>     > <david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx>
>     <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     Al 24/11/12 17:04, En/na Stefan Schwarzburg ha escrit:
>     >     > Hi David,
>     >     >
>     >     > today I spent some time waiting with a smartphone in my
>     hand, and used
>     >     > that time to research PySide and QML.
>     >     >
>     >
>     >     Hey Stefan,
>     >
>     >     Thanks for your time looking into this. Let me try to reply
>     inline.
>     >
>     >     > I have to say, that I'm less than impressed. Actually,
>     PySide seems to
>     >     > be even more verbose and convoluted than PyGObject, and I
>     already
>     >     > thought that this was at the edge of being acceptable.
>     >     >
>     >
>     >     I can't reply on this one, as I haven't played with it much
>     yet, but
>     >     unless it's extremely convoluted to write the code, I'm not
>     personally
>     >     much concerned about it if the end result is going to be a
>     significant
>     >     improvement.
>     >
>     >     > And QML, while a step in the right direction from the Glade ui
>     >     files, is
>     >     > very Javascript heavy. It seems as if designing is not
>     really possible
>     >     > without JavaScript.
>     >
>     >     In my little experience with QML, my understanding is that:
>     >
>     >     - You can design apps with QML alone
>     >     - For more complex apps, you might need to add Javascript
>     >     - For even more complex apps, you'll need to resort to C++ (or
>     in our
>     >     case, Python)
>     >
>     >     But, of course, this will have to be put to the test to see if
>     it really
>     >     applies or I'm just talking nonsense :)
>     >
>     >     > From the perspective of a C++ developer, QML is certainly a step
>     >     in the
>     >     > right direction. Developers and designers now have to write
>     much less
>     >     > C++ code, and I understand that this is a good thing. Now,
>     GUI heavy
>     >     > applications can be written with Qt, but completely without C++.
>     >     > But from the perspective of a Python developer, JavaScript
>     is not
>     >     a step
>     >     > in the right direction (at least not for me).
>     >     >
>     >
>     >     Right. To be clear, it's my intention to stay on Python too,
>     and not go
>     >     into the C++ or JavaScript realm. Now, if we have to write a small
>     >     amount of JavaScript in addition, and for UI purposes only, I
>     don't see
>     >     it much of an issue. Assuming that our logic and core code is
>     in Python.
>     >
>     >     > I think that if we really set our minds to developing
>     Qreator with
>     >     > JavaScript, we should really use HTML5+CSS3. This would
>     allow us to
>     >     > completely ignore the desktop, be open for every OS, and let the
>     >     > integration be done by Ubuntu-webapps or similar.
>     >     > However, I don't like the idea of using JavaScript. Actually,
>     >     since this
>     >     > is a project that I like to do in my spare time, I would
>     prefer to
>     >     stick
>     >     > to Python.
>     >     >
>     >
>     >     I agree with the point of going to HTML5, but not because of a
>     potential
>     >     switch to JavaScript. If we were to go to HTML5, the two main
>     'pro'
>     >     points would be:
>     >
>     >     - It is a web-wide standard
>     >     - It would allow us to have the same code running on the web
>     and on the
>     >     desktop
>     >
>     >     However, if we were to do that, I'd rather use the approach of
>     embedding
>     >     the UI into a webkit view and have the backend still be Python
>     (with
>     >     perhaps a small amount of JavaScript if CSS3 would not allow
>     us to to
>     >     everything we want to do). There is some example code in the
>     Quickly
>     >     HTML5 template at
>     https://code.launchpad.net/quickly-community-templates
>     >
>     >     Having said that, I don't think HTML5 is ready for our
>     purposes yet, as
>     >     I'm still primarily considering Qreator to be a client app,
>     not a web
>     >     app. The spanner(s) in the works for me are:
>     >
>     >     - No native widgets
>     >     - No Unity integration
>     >     - No internationalization support
>     >
>     >     > So my suggestion would be to focus (after that release) on the
>     >     > separation of GUI and background-logic and then we can
>     explore Qt,
>     >     but I
>     >     > would then also like to explore kivy. The kivy language is
>     very much
>     >     > like QML, but integrates python in stead of JavaScript, and kivy
>     >     itself
>     >     > is the most pythonic GUI-toolkit I have seen so far.
>     >
>     >     I fully agree. However, although it looks pretty awesome, I'm
>     still not
>     >     convinced by kivy.
>     >
>     >     For the purposes of exploring our choices, I've created
>     >    
>     https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Qreator/GetInvolved/Brainstorm/GuiToolkitChoice
>     >
>     >     If you'd like to advocate for kivy, would you mind filling in
>     the kivy
>     >     part, so that when we make the actual decision we can base it
>     on the
>     >     facts from our research?
>     >
>     >     Thanks.
>     >
>     >     > I'm aware that kivy has many disadvantages, especially the
>     lack of
>     >     > support from Unity specific tools (dbus-menu, HUD, Gtk-themes,
>     >     ...) but
>     >     > I think that I will have much more fun coding with kivy than
>     with Qt.
>     >     >
>     >
>     >     I think the fun factor is an important one to take into account,
>     >     especially when contributing to a project in the spare time.
>     However, we
>     >     should also throw into the mix the end result for users,
>     >     maintainability, documentation and other factors to come up
>     with a good
>     >     balance.
>     >
>     >     If you've got any ideas for the criteria we should evaluate when
>     >     choosing the GUI toolkit, please do feel free to add them to
>     the wiki
>     >     page, I've added a placeholder text under the comparison table
>     header.
>     >
>     >     Thanks again for your input!
>     >
>     >     Cheers,
>     >     David.
>     >
>     >     > Let me know what you think...
>     >     >
>     >     > Cheers,
>     >     > Stefan
>     >     >
>     >     > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:01 PM, David Planella
>     >     > <david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx>>
>     >     <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:david.planella@xxxxxxxxxx>>>> wrote:
>     >     >
>     >     >     Al 23/11/12 16:27, En/na Stefan Schwarzburg ha escrit:
>     >     >     > Hi David,
>     >     >     >
>     >     >     > one small question: Your plan was to switch to Qt
>     after this
>     >     release,
>     >     >     > right? Not to develop two GUIs in parallel...
>     >     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     >     Exactly, that was the idea, a switch and just one single UI.
>     >     >
>     >     >     Cheers,
>     >     >     David.
>     >     >
>     >     >
>     >     >     --
>     >     >     Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~qreator-discuss
>     >     >     Post to     : qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
>     >     >     <mailto:qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     >     <mailto:qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>>
>     >     >     Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~qreator-discuss
>     >     >     More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>     >     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     >
> 
> 
>     --
>     David Planella
>     Ubuntu Translations Coordinator
>     www.ubuntu.com <http://www.ubuntu.com> /
>     www.davidplanella.wordpress.com <http://www.davidplanella.wordpress.com>
>     www.identi.ca/dplanella <http://www.identi.ca/dplanella> /
>     www.twitter.com/dplanella <http://www.twitter.com/dplanella>
> 
> 
>     --
>     Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~qreator-discuss
>     Post to     : qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>     <mailto:qreator-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>     Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~qreator-discuss
>     More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature