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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Replacement for Qt's Undo Framework
From:       Bèrto ëd Sèra <berto.d.sera () gmail ! com>
Date:       2011-04-26 7:29:36
Message-ID: BANLkTi=zRPm428gk7v94G29cAh=vFya56A () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Tom,

with all the due respect, "improve" should mean the Qt version does the job,
but you have a more specific target to meet, which is alien to Qt. I'm not
aware of Qt localization having defined Russian "off target", so I'd say an
upstream bug is an upstream bug. That's unless Qt says they have no interest
for localization...

Bèrto

On 26 April 2011 10:12, Tom Albers <toma@kde.org> wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> > On Monday, April 25, 2011 22:12:55 Alexander Potashev wrote:
> > > What do you think about inclusion of KUndo*2 into kdelibs?
> >
> > we really don't want more duplication of code and effort between Qt
> > and
> > kdelibs, and we certainly don't want forks of Qt code in kdelibs.
>
> Forks? It does sound like to me as we take the base class from Qt and
> improve it for usage within KDE. We've done that for years and years. Does
> this now imply that that's bad practice and kdelibs is closed for such
> classes?
>
> Best,
> --
> Tom Albers
> KDE Sysadmin
>



-- 
==============================
If Pac-Man had affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in a darkened
room munching pills and listening to repetitive music.

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

Tom,<br><br>with all the due respect, &quot;improve&quot; should mean the Qt version \
does the job, but you have a more specific target to meet, which is alien to Qt. \
I&#39;m not aware of Qt localization having defined Russian &quot;off target&quot;, \
so I&#39;d say an upstream bug is an upstream bug. That&#39;s unless Qt says they \
have no interest for localization...<br> <br><div>Bèrto</div><div><br><div \
class="gmail_quote">On 26 April 2011 10:12, Tom Albers <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a \
href="mailto:toma@kde.org">toma@kde.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex;"> <div class="im">----- Original Message -----<br>
&gt; On Monday, April 25, 2011 22:12:55 Alexander Potashev wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt; What do you think about inclusion of KUndo*2 into kdelibs?<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; we really don&#39;t want more duplication of code and effort between Qt<br>
&gt; and<br>
&gt; kdelibs, and we certainly don&#39;t want forks of Qt code in kdelibs.<br>
<br>
</div>Forks? It does sound like to me as we take the base class from Qt and improve \
it for usage within KDE. We&#39;ve done that for years and years. Does this now imply \
that that&#39;s bad practice and kdelibs is closed for such classes?<br>

<br>
Best,<br>
<font color="#888888">--<br>
Tom Albers<br>
KDE Sysadmin<br>
</font></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- \
<br>==============================<br><span style="font-family:Verdana, Arial, \
Helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12px;line-height:17px">If Pac-Man had affected us as \
kids, we&#39;d all be running around in a darkened room munching pills and listening \
to repetitive music.</span><br>

</div>



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