And you forgot to quote:

MarkS: “I use KDE on my desktop, I enjoy seeing the pace of change there, there is a lot of innovation in KDE4. I think the KDE guys have a point when they say their approach has made it easier for them to make leaps forward than the GNOME approach which has very predictable release schedules.”

So everybody has little own view of the world.
No point to write about it and piss people off ( see Sams Re: )

In fact it was the derStandard.at headline which I believed came from you, and which (IMHO) overstated a minor part of the interview: “Shuttleworth: “Apple is driving the innovation” – Sees possibility for a Qt-based GNOME”

You mentioned in private email that the headline didn’t come from you – so allow me to apologise for impugning you. Your editor might have been more careful, though

Cheers,
Dave.

This part I actually find quite offensive. Could you please tell me where I “went beyond what was said”. I published an interview with Mark Shuttleworth, with no commentary whatsoever.

I get your point.

The point I was making is that first Andreas, and then Sam, went beyond what was said, in an effort to create conflict where none exists.

In fact, there seems to be some concensus among a lot of people I talk to that QT is a really nice platform, and I suspect that if their licencing were different (and now that their owner doesn’t desperately need licencing fees, it might become different), then GNOME *would* be facing some interesting discussions & decisions.

Dave.

i may be nuts as well but i don’t see the point of this entire conversation.

the media once again blindsides a f/oss spokesperson which sucks hugely. let’s not turn on each other in response, though. it’s a f/oss media problem and should be, imho, treated as such.

@Alan Horkin: “I’ve been meaning to mess about and see if I can get KDE/QT applications running in Gnome with the standard Gnome button order in dialogs,”

this works out of the box, as long as dialogs use the QDialogButtonBox, as all dialogs in kdelibs and Qt do right now.

What I took from this was that Mark is aware that QT is getting better and better at integrating with the local platform, and with a bit of work a QT application could be nicely integrated into an otherwise GTK/Gnome desktop.

Since QT 4.2 I’ve been meaning to mess about and see if I can get KDE/QT applications running in Gnome with the standard Gnome button order in dialogs, or at least find out if it is as easy as I hope it could be.

Because after all there was a LOT of discussion about the future of GTK.
This discussion is not possible in Qt, because Trolltech steers the direction of Qt.

The most important thing that you should take from this is that developers AND “influencing people” like Mark seem to want that both Qt and GTK collaborate more than they do right now (the other way round, that Kde and Gnome collaborate more, but if they do, I am sure both Gtk and Qt will have some kind of formal agreement on which features to implement to make life of USERS _and_ developers of Gtk/Qt easier)

The license part is really a non-issue. It is basically LGPL vs GPL/commercial.

The biggest issue at hand really is what will happen with GTK, because I am sure Gnome will follow GTK. So people, let’s concentrate on GTK. I already told my feature wish list – it includes css files for use in GTK apps themeing. I never liked the themeing in current GTK, i like my .css files