Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.swapon.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Mike Easter Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Here comes LXQt: merge of two lightweight desktop projects, LXDE, and QT Date: Mon, 12 May 2014 09:44:46 -0700 Lines: 18 Message-ID: References: <87bnv3du96.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <20140512145650.71dd961e.rsw@therandymon.com> <87egzzq7rf.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net RvjpTLzppqeWCuv23XyFPgkPseXJpmFyQ85bqpKxtBLaVHUbVp Cancel-Lock: sha1:a/i/uKsjN4HwwKDDzFzcOYPLwas= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 In-Reply-To: <87egzzq7rf.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:2763 Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > I'm an LXDE user and worry about big changes. LXDE was based on gtk+2 and needed to be migrated to gtk+3. The developers who considered that and the fact that there would be an increase in resource usage for either migration to gtk+3 or qt (they chose qt4 rather than qt5 while waiting for qt5.1) and that the qt transition was a very mild resource increase. JULY 3, 2013 http://blog.lxde.org/?p=1013 Elsewhere another developer said that qt coding was much preferred to gtk+3 who considered it bloated and buggy. -- Mike Easter