[GRASS-dev] v.digit: Qt or wxWidgets

[Hamish]

Michael:
> We'll also need people with some expertise in that toolkit to port the
> GUI.

I think if we all learn one system we can help each other and it won't
be "too much". Sure, we'll need expert help along the way.


Trevor:
> However if we know we will drop Tcl/Tk, then perhaps it would be
> reasonable to think about how far gis.m needs to be taken before
> beginning development on the replacement.

The hard part is the design*, not the implementation**.

[*] menu clustering, good icons, correct use of WIND vs WIND_OVERRIDE, etc.
[**] what language it is finally written in.

As long as we are not spending all our time working around TclTk
limitations, I don't see new work on gis.m as being wasted. Quite the
contrary.

> [Python]

Python lowers the barriers to entry & removes whole classes of bugs,
which is nice when our numbers of expert C programmers is low. We'd have
a lot more devels for the project too. This is why TclTk has been nice.
But I know zero Python, GTK, Qt, Wx, etc. :)
We can improve GRASS's SWIG code as needed.

To air personal preferences:    (purely cosmetic, so "+0")
I find Qt too bubble-gum, Tcl/Tk (even themes*) too ugly.
[*] the Mac/Win native ones are ok.


Glynn:
> I'm more concerned about the Mac. In particular, the fact that you can
> use the Unix/X11 version of GTK with an X server allows developers to
> "cop out" and risks reducing the motivation to develop the native
> version.

Are you saying it's a "cop out" for us or for the MacGTK porters?

It is a crutch; we can develop with X11 GTK on Mac and release with
native GTK when it is ready. We are not going backwards by doing that.
My guess is that GTK is big enough and Mac devels are pro-native enough
that the existing situation will not last very long.



Hamish