From: "Shot (Piotr Szotkowski)" <shot@...>
Date: 2007-05-15T18:09:03+09:00
Subject: Re: WxSugar vs. Ruby-GNOME2

--e5bfZ/T2xnjpUIbw
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Pau Garcia i Quiles:

> Quoting "Shot (Piotr Szotkowski)" <shot@hot.pl>:

>> I=E2=80=99m an Ubuntu user, so GTK/GNOME is my primary platform; running
>> the app under Windows would be a nice addition, but not the ultimate
>> goal.

>> Is my current vision that Ruby-GNOME2 would be a better choice [than
>> wxSugar] in my case the right one? (More stable, more documentation,
>> more controls, the possibility to develop in Glade.)

>> Is running a Ruby-GNOME2 app under Windows a lot
>> of hassle, compared to WxSugar + rubyscript2exe?

> I hate to repeat myself, but: use QtRuby. It rules.

Ok, call me lazy here, but is there a nice demonstration of QtRuby
that=E2=80=99s would convince me to give it a try (especially that I=E2=80=
=99d have
to install Qt, skin it so it=E2=80=99s bearable and kiss Glade good-bye)?

For example, Ruby-GNOME2=E2=80=99s
http://ruby-gnome2.sourceforge.jp/hiki.cgi?RubyZilla
does scream =E2=80=98take me! take me!=E2=80=99 in a *very* persuasive mann=
er. :)

-- Shot
--=20
> I've gone through over-stressed to physical exhaustion - what's next?
Tuesday.                                   -- Simon Burr and Kyle Hearn

--e5bfZ/T2xnjpUIbw
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGSXEki/mCfdEo8UoRAkoHAKCb5Y+bF+SDDEPfvquBhWukzncIvgCgu760
oZeVp8uG428hdT2Rr3p96Gc=
=4Qr2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--e5bfZ/T2xnjpUIbw--