[jewel] Re: Current state of Jewel-OBJC
- From: Frank Hale <frankhale@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: jewel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 25 May 2003 15:57:14 -0700 (PDT)
> It shouldn't be, Frank, as I've not done much of a
> clean-up there yet,
> so it's still basically your tree...
Well I dunno what code base you forked it from but
I've done alot of work since then. But I'm not to
proud to say that it needs work and the code could
always be better. But the code now is not hideous
thats for sure. Compare it with Sapphire and you have
a gem. Sapphire is however hideous which is why its
dead.
> ...and I still think shared lib themes are a
> misfeature.
Could you explain why it is you think its a
misfeature. I'd take all the info you got on how to
make a generic theme engine that will except arbitrary
themes and do the right thing. I have yet to be able
to design such a beast. Share libs at this point seem
like a nice alternative to the fact that I'm not able
to do what I originally wanted to do. And since KDE
does it, it can't be all that bad. But you will likely
not agree as you probably think KDE is the devil in
the open source world or something.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
