On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 16:28 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote: > On Fri, 2010-04-30 at 15:18 +0100, Jamie Bennett wrote: > > So is the 'be-all-and-end-all' criteria that mobile Linux GTK app's > > need > > to run on Harmattan? Nokia's push has been indeed immense but GTK on > > their devices is slowly dying in favour of QT so any push in this > > direction seems somewhat short-sighted. > > I don't know. I think that's the point of this money from Nokia. > > Even if it isn't, GTK+ apps on Harmattan is doable, though they would > never be quite right. So it seems very worthwhile to let our apps at > least run reasonably on a (probably) widely-distributed consumer > hardware platform, without people having to reinstall their entire OS. But the point is that Nokia and GTK are set to split up. Targeting their devices may not be such a good idea especially as they are enforcing a 'MeeGo Compliance' test which may or may not include/exclude GTK. I would like to see really effort behind something that is GTK orientated but that requires compliance with manufactures. Currently we have Nokia, moving to QT, Android, which is Java (dalvik) based, and WebOS (now under HP's control) which is JavaScript based. Any effort here would be hackish and a bolt-on at best. Where is the GTK-based initiative now that Nokia have moved on and OpenMoko have all but died? Regards, Jamie. -- Jamie Bennett www.linuxuk.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part