Re: k3b replaces gnomebaker?

[GÃrard Monpontet <gerard.monpontet@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Felipe

I am not your opinion, history 
 The software will tell you the contrary, I 
 Opinion is just that I do 
 Why kdelib qt and would not be part 
 The ISO

GÃrard


Le Monday 15 October 2007 22:00:41 Felipe Sere, vous avez ÃcritÂ:
> I honestly see no reason why QT and KDE is needed on the ISO.
> Provide bashburn and be happy. I think sticking to the "NO-QT" and
> "NO-BLOAT" philosophy is more important than providing k3b.
>
> On 10/15/07, Sebastian Reisse <sebastian.j.reisse@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > seeing this line at the snapshot changelog shocked me:
> >
> >
> > [xap] Added k3b-1.0.3-i486-50.1.tgz (replaces gnomebaker)
> >
> > I guess this is because of gnomebaker is not supporting cdrkit but
> > that's no reason to go for KDE bloated stuff!
> >
> > If only k3b supports cdrkit I would say we eighter forget about cdrkit
> > and stick cdrtools and gnomebaker (or any other gtk-based app) or if you
> > really want to replace cdrtools with cdrkit making gnomebaker and other
> > frontends unusable than provide no gui burning tool but some scripts for
> > the console or maybe bashburn.
> >
> > The reason why one will choose ZW is because it is tiny, fast and runs
> > on older Hardware as well and (like in my case) because it is 100% KDE
> > and qt free!
> >
> > By implementing k3b you will break with the qt free tradition in ZW and
> > you add unneccesary bloat to the ISO! JP, why is that? Are you on drugs?
> > ;)
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > --
> > Sebastian Reisse
> >
> > E-Mail: sebastian.j.reisse@xxxxxxx
> > ICQ:    38670797
> > Jabber: seb2@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > powered by
> >        __   _
> >       / /  (_) __  __ ____  __
> >      / /__/ // _ \/ // /\ \/ /
> > GNU /____/_//_//_/\___/ /_/\_\