[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: KDE 3.0 - the last steps
From:       Rolf Magnus <ramagnus () t-online ! de>
Date:       2002-03-22 15:14:02
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 22 March 2002 15:54, Simon Hausmann wrote:

> What if everthing would be value based? The application could do
> what it wants with the information it retrieves from the framework,
> while still allowing to use implicit sharing to keep memory usage
> down.

You mean with copy on write so that the original isn't destroyed? That'd be 
possible, although it still doesn't make sense that an app can change 
anything in it, because it is not able and not supposed be able to write 
anything back there.

> (to get my API rants down to a point I should probably better make a
> patch -- remind me on irc about it, tonight :)

Well, patches are welcome if they work and do not change too much of the api 
(or if you do all other needed changes), which would in this case mean change 
all the plugins again ;)

> > What's the difference? I mean BIC does also just result in package
> > dependancies, no?
>
> Yes, but binary incompatibility affects more than the packages we
> have control over (in the sense that they are part of a KDE release) .

Ah, of course. Although as long as nobody else uses it, this won't be a 
problem.

> So it comes down to the point that we have a different opinion on
> installing header files containing notice like 'Do not use these
> methods, they will change in 3.1' . I for one believe that this
> shouldn't happen and that such header files should not get
> installed.

The kfile-plugins and the noatun stuff depend on it, so either the header 
would need to be installed or copied into kdegraphics and kdemultimedia.

-- 
How come Superman could stop bullets with his chest,
but always ducked when someone threw a gun at him?

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]