From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BH2zg-0005aW-DF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:53:36 -0400 Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1BH2wT-0003aG-Hy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:50:51 -0400 Received: from [24.21.209.245] (helo=pdx.silverbeach.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1BH2wH-00039Q-6X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Apr 2004 11:50:05 -0400 From: Kyle Hayes Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Qemu frontend proposal Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2004 08:50:03 -0700 References: <200404230913.54616.jm@poure.com> In-Reply-To: <200404230913.54616.jm@poure.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200404230850.03938.kyle@silverbeach.net> Reply-To: kyle@silverbeach.net, qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: jm@poure.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Friday 23 April 2004 00:13, Jean-Michel POURE wrote: > Dear all, > > Fabrice expressed the need for a Qemu frontend. Before working on > anything, I would like to discuss about possible plans and receive > some feedback. > > My proposals are: > > 1) Framework : wxWidgets > 2) Interface builder : wxGlade There are two perfectly good toolkits that are on nearly every distro out of the box right now: GTK and Qt. Both have excellent tools and language bindings and interface builders. Python has perfectly good bindings for Qt and GTK on its own. I see no functional need at all to introduce yet another toolkit. Building open source projects is already getting to be more and more annoying as each one wants to bring in another fifty dependencies that are not usually installed. And, each one wants to wrap some perfectly good libraries in their own just-barely-different wrappers. The more dependencies everything has the more likely we'll all end up in the Linux version of Windows DLL hell. Please, please, please think twice about introducing new dependencies! What are the goals for a QEMU interface? Here's what I'd like to see: 1) portable. 2) very lightweight. 3) remotely accessible. 4) easily maintained and changed. 5) i18n. What this says to me is that a web interface would cover what I want. And, that is guaranteed to be portable. In my experience, an embedded web interface tends to be smaller (code size) than any toolkit-based code. When the browser isn't up, you aren't using that memory. Better yet, make the interface in QEMU in XML-RPC and then everyone and their dog can write an interface in any language or system. Please stay with the Unix philosophy of making each tool do one thing well. Best, Kyle