Re: Some ideas

[allbery ece cmu edu]

On 28 Jun, Sarel J. Botha wrote:
+-----
|  I think everything has to be more modularized. Take for example Bonobo, it's
|  going to be a part of GNOME and only GNOME. If the KDE guys want something
|  similar they'll have to code it themselves and then it won't play nicely with
|  bonobo etc.
+--->8

They already have their own:  KOM aka OpenParts.

But the situation isn't quite as bad as you imply:  as long as KOM and
Bonobo have sufficiently similar (not just "comparable") functionality,
all it takes is an adapter at the component level to allow KOM
components to sit on top of Bonobo or vice versa.  And if they're
similar enough, they don't even need an adaptor.  The next level down
is an ORB, and mico and ORBit are already capable of talking to each
other --- that's the whole point of a CORBA implementation.

|  What I would REALLY love is if an app could be written once and then run on
|  KDE or GNOME. This could probably easy be implemented via a wrapper or
|  something (I'm not really a programmer).
+--->8

That has been discussed before; it's not quite as trivial as you think,
as Gtk and Qt (the underlying widget implementations for GNOME and KDE)
work in different ways.  They do pretty much the same thing, but the
*way* they do it is sufficiently different that any "wrapper" would be
huge and slow, as would applications using the wrapper.

That said, there is already a dialog between the GNOME and KDE
developers --- and in particular, there is work to make sure that
Bonobo and KOM will interoperate so that KOM components can plug into a
Bonobo framework and vice versa.  The situation isn't quite as bad as
it looks on Slashdot....

-- 
brandon s. allbery	[os/2][linux][solaris][japh]	 allbery@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator	     [WAY too many hats]	   allbery@ece.cmu.edu
carnegie mellon / electrical and computer engineering			 KF8NH
     We are Linux. Resistance is an indication that you missed the point.