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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Checkin of new Koffice
From:       Lotzi Boloni <boloni () cs ! purdue ! edu>
Date:       1999-10-06 15:45:01
[Download RAW message or body]

> >> Anyway: As I guess with this checkin the KOffice apps which are not ported yet,
> >> do not compile with canossa until they are ported, IŽd really prefer if you
> >> could check the new stuff in into a new branch or into a new module. Or was
> >> this the plan anyway? :-)
> >
> >  Hey, please don't do that!
> >
> > Even if it is not compiling for some days it is better that way, because
> >at least we know where some work is needed and do it fast. I will port
> >kchart in at most three days, once the other stuff is commited. 
> 
> The branch or modul should only exist for the time of porting the apps. So your
> agrument against another branch of module is not valid :-) Torben and me made
> already made a very bad experience when we once wanted to do a big port and
> just broke KOffice. 
> 
> So as there is much more code in KOffice than just kchart which has to be
> ported, it makes it just easier to port the stuff if you do it in two
> modules/branches as you have always still a working version around.

  Well, I can handle it both ways. 

  I think that you are speaking of the DOM port effort. But on the other
hand we have the Qt 2.0 port effort, where it was a branch solution which
led to a terrible, absolutely unacceptable setback in the development
process, and we still have to emerge from it. While if we had moved in
one, radical move, at the right moment to Qt 2 it could have been done in
one week for all applications. And think about the recent, really smooth
transition to cuteIDL. I know, canossa is a bigger change, but still. 

             Lotzi

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