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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Status of kdenetwork module
From:       mosfet <mosfet () mandrakesoft ! com>
Date:       2000-05-17 13:36:59
[Download RAW message or body]

I talked to Simon about kvirc as well. KSirc seems essentially
unmaintained right now and as someone who uses IRC a lot it really does
need a lot of work. Not only fixing segfaults, but also with the UI.
KVirc OTOH is very actively maintained and now has a crapload of
features. This does make it rather huge (it has it's own help browser,
etc...) but is a quite cool and actively maintained client IMHO.

From my emails with him, he is willing to commit kvirc into CVS but not
maintain it there. He would simply automatically update KDE CVS from his
CVS for kvirc. He seems to want to have a little more control over it's
development, which is understandable. Nonetheless I don't really think
this is okay - things distributed in KDE packages should be maintained
there as well so everyone can add essential fixes, etc... 

If you guys are willing to let him continue maintaining in his CVS and
just updating ours periodically I think he would go for it. I don't know
if that's good or not. Either way something has to be done about IRC and
kdenetwork.

Matthias Kalle Dalheimer wrote:
> 
> Carsten Pfeiffer wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 17 May 2000, Matthias Kalle Dalheimer wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > A number of people now told me that kvirc might be a better alternative.
> > > What do you think about that? Any other suggestions?
> >
> > yes, kvirc is pretty feature-rich and stable - the problem is that the
> > author doesn't want to develop it in kde's CVS. He wants to keep control
> > over it. Now we could still ship it with KDE2; I'm sure he would agree
> > with that.
> >
> > I for one don't like kvirc because it is so big, it's using MDI and I
> > find all those fancy buttons rather disturbing (that's why I mentioned
> > the unobtrusiveness of ksirc).
> >
> > >From a codebase point of view, I'm sure kvirc is in a better shape, so we
> > might ship kvirc with KDE2 and keep ksirc maybe in kdenonbeta as
> > standalone application.
> 
> This won't work. An application that is shipped with the KDE base
> distribution must be in the KDE CVS - imagine it turns out two weeks
> before the release that we absolutely need to change an API and then
> cannot update a core application.
> 
> >
> > > On second thought, if Carsten wants to handle freshing ksirc up, why not
> > > keep it - people are probably used to using it already, and those that
> > > have other preferences can always download other irc clients.
> >
> > Either way is fine for me.
> 
> Then let's stay with ksirc, I'd say. People can always kvirc if they
> want.
> 
> >
> > > Carsten, mind if I put you on the list as the new maintainer (after
> > > asking Andrew first, of course)?
> 
> I wrote to him this morning...
> 
> Kalle
> 
> --
> Kalle Dalheimer     Contract programming for Unix
> kalle@dalheimer.de  Technical writing
> kalle@kde.org       Technical editing
> kalle@oreilly.de    KDE Developer (MFCH)
> mdalheimer@acm.org  It's open, it's source, it runs - must be KDE!
> 
> Lukashenko and the Pope - the last remaining dictators in Europe.

-- 
Daniel M. Duley - Unix developer & sys admin.
http://www.mosfet.org - The place for KDE development news.
mosfet@mandrakesoft.com
mosfet@kde.org

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