Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 03:28:35 -0600 From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> To: Will Andrews <andrews@technologist.com> Cc: ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: KDE tree? Message-ID: <00040103411800.07622@nomad.dataplex.net> In-Reply-To: <20000331223315.E1615@argon.blackdawn.com> References: <200003312226.OAA34850@tao.thought.org> <00033121002200.07215@nomad.dataplex.net> <20000331223315.E1615@argon.blackdawn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 31 Mar 2000, Will Andrews wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2000 at 08:56:24PM -0600, Richard Wackerbarth wrote: > > I think we need to seriously rethink this. We should NEVER need to MOVE > > anything. We should use a convention whereby new things come in and > > old ones get dropped but each thing should be able to have only one "home" > > during its entire life cycle. > > Please inform me as to how I can persuade every single KDE 1.1.x-based > programmer to rewrite their apps so they work on KDE2. :) > > Oh yeah, and the -i18n app writers too. Oh, oh. Qt 1.45 vs. Qt 2.0, that's > just another can of worms. Sorry, I don't see what this has to do with my comment. KDE2 is a different product. IHMO, it should never occupy the same namespace (in our source tree) as KDE1. Eventually, KDE1 will disappear just as FreeBSD 2.x is doing. But in the interim, they each need their own namespace. And that namespace should not be one that is shared in time. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?00040103411800.07622>