Re: [tdf-discuss] Clear separation between frontend and backend?

On Sat, 06 Nov 2010 15:58:37 -0600, RGB ES <rgb.mldc@gmail.com> wrote:

> I was thinking on something similar. If it were possible to completely
> separate "core" from UI it would be great. For example, someone who
> knows Qt but nothing about GTK will be able to create a gui for MeeGo
> without messing with core elements. Or someone else will be able to
> build a gui for small monitors. Or another person will be able to
> build something for "power users" in which you can only see style
> stuff while just another person will contribute a kids & format
> painter lovers interface.
>
>
> To go on with this idea, I think it will be interesting to make the
> core "toolkit independent" (i.e., pure C or C++, without GTK or any
> stuff like that), so it will be possible to integrate LibO on any
> platform "just" (yes, I know it is not easy, that's why I used
> quotes... ;) ) by writing a proper UI.

A couple of years ago during an event in Spain (Desktop Summit) people  
from Nokia approach me as the only OOo representative in the event. They  
expressed their proposal on having OOo adopt Qt as their UI. The proposal  
represent some advantages. Certainly the development cost will be  
disipated since the toolkit would be mantained by a broader community.

I still got the guy's card and probably try to get them to come close to  
the LO dev team with more information about this.

> 2010/11/6 Lee Hyde <anubeon@gmail.com>:
> > Greetings All,
> >
> > I'm just a humble end user, and frankly I have little-to-no knowledge of
> > software development but I was wondering whether there is a clear
> > separation between frontend and backend with LibreOffice. Such that it
> > would make it easy to essentially 'slot-in' a replacement GUI.
> >
> > As I say, I'm not familiar with software development in general much
> > less the specifics of OOo/LibO but it seems to the that one of the
> > better ways to encourage innovation is to make it easy for people to
> > 'hack' on individual modules and in particular the GUI (which is in dire
> > need of modernisation and optimisation in my humble opinion). If
> > 'hacking' a new GUI onto OOo/Lib (a'la IBM Lotus Symphony) at the moment
> > is non-trivial it will hinder innovation in the form of specialist forks
> > (which could be very useful for the mother project) and/or experimental
> > UI (which are clearly intended to showcase innovative ideas to see if
> > they could or should be merged into the mother project).
> >
> > I just thought I'd bring this up in light of all the discussion
> > regarding UI reform. Of course I could be way off base here, and if I am
> > please do set me straight; if I need some edumacating regarding the
> > state of OOo/LibO do edumacatify me!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Lee Hyde.
> >
> > P.S. The quote in my signature was chosen at random, rather appropriate
> > though don't you think?
> >
> > --
> > "There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?"
> >
> >        -- Dr. Jonas Stalk, on being asked who owned the patent for his  
> > polio vaccine
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
> > Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
> > Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
> > *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
> Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
> Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***


--
Alexandro Colorado
OOoES A.C - http://oooes.org
GPG: 68D072E6

--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***