It's not strange at all. They're going back to GTK2 to stay away from GTK3 while they develop the Qt version.
Originally Posted by deve
Monochrome icons in file-chooser do NOT respond to themes
I cannot find any options to replace the monochrome icons in the gtk-file-chooser. They are a glaring mismatch to my custom theme, the only way I can think of to get rid of them would be to custom compile GTK3 with the icons manually switched out for my own. That would require keeping all the build-deps for GTK3 installed, rebuilding everytime GTK3 gets an update something else depends on, and be yet another fork away from the Ubuntu base of my own private remix of Ubuntustudio and Mint with perhaps a dozen installations to mantain.
Originally Posted by oleid
If GTK3 continues in this direction, that work by the MATE team to port GTK2 to Wayland will become damned important in a few years, and the Cinnamon folks may have to lock and fork GTK3 just to keep their themes looking reasonable and window controls working. They've already had to fork most of GNOME, if they have to fork GTK3 and maybe even Clutter that's a lot more work for the mint team.
I can understand their position. I fucking hate tablets and their interfaces for dumbed-down people.
Gnome Music app keeps getting better and better. I haven't opened Audacious in 3 years.
main flaw of gtk3 is ever changing state and the fact your application looks/works completely different than everything if you don't run it in gnome. but, there were also components that are not present anywhere like AppMenu to make it even worse.
Originally Posted by psychoticmeow
last announcements from gtk were fixing most things that were problematic for non gnome developers. only bug i can see is that they want to wait with releasing of stable 4 for scene graph. which can be way too long
qt adoption is not necessary good thing. it was competition that created dual licensed qt after all. and i'm yet to see one decent looking qt theme
Qt should be the new standard, really. But it needs to drop the proprietary version. Become the "SDL of desktop applications".
Yeah... I wish gnucash would switch to qt. It looks pretty ugly under windows or kde.
I currently use clementine for my music player (which is qt based) and it looks native on win/mac/linux/kde/gnome/etc.
Not reading much about this porting decision but I'm wondering what benefit it could have by going Qt.
Better cross-platform support? Yes, Qt4/5 indeed has better support on Win and OS X. But how many users who may want to use cross-platform audacious over many existing ones native on these platform.
Better Linux support? Porting to Qt4 will lose Wayland support in GTK3+. Qt5, well, has not been widely adopted by Linux distributions. Besides, desktop linux is no longer the focus point of Qt world.
The proprietary version is what makes the free one so good. There are alternative business models that could work without it, but Digia uses it to fund development so we can get the general toolkit under GPL / LGPL. It is like if you made a video game where the base game was FOSS and it had proprietary DLC you paid for to support core development.
Originally Posted by xeekei
That would actually be an interesting game development model. Albeit it is basically freemium except with more freedom.
I never looked at Qt until they changed the license model, but honestly what Digia does with their clients doesn't matter to me - I usually won't use the proprietary software produced with it anyway (I have Skype in a container for a few of my friends who like selling their souls to MS...) but we get a GPL toolkit that kicks butt with license protection from KDE.
Then what should we do? Linux desktop other than GNOME isn't the focus point of GTK3. Should we fork GTK2?
Originally Posted by lovenemesis