From kde-core-devel  Mon Mar 05 03:10:58 2001
From: David Faure <david () mandrakesoft ! com>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 03:10:58 +0000
To: kde-core-devel
Subject: Re: 2.2 RELEASE SCHEDULE (proposal) [NOTE: 2.2 != 2.1.1]
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=98376207421993

On Monday 05 March 2001 02:58, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Waldo Bastian wrote:
> 
> > The 2.2 release, unlike the 2.1.1 release, will come with new functionality 
> > and improvements in many areas of KDE. 
> > 
> > We aim for the following improvements among others: 
> > * Better printing framework. 
> > * IMAP support in kmail 
> > * New koffice release.
> 
> Question: should the IPv6 code be included?
> 
> I've been working on it for the past few months and it is quite stable 
> for me, even on a mixed KDE 2.0 with 2.1 kdelibs environment.
> 
> However, that's only for me. I have had no reports whatsoever of anyone 
> actually trying my patches, even though I know half a dozen people 
> downloaded it (Apache logs). So I don't know how well it works or what 
> breaks outside my system.
> 
> And the reason I'm asking: the introduction of this new code so deep in 
> the library core makes the whole thing alpha stage again, since we rely 
> on sockets heavily.

Then now is the best time to commit it into CVS (HEAD obviously).

> So, my suggestion: the code is integrated into the sources, but it won't 
> be enabled by default for 2.2. Or 2.2 beta 1 at least. It would be 
> #ifdef'ed out.

If you ifdef it out (and require the 'user' to enable the code), then it's not
really useful - won't be more tested than right now with a separate patch...

Doesn't it only matter for IPv6 "users" anyway ? How does that work ?
Configure check ? Or rather runtime-detection of the type of address used ?
The primary goal should be that everything works the same for IPv4 users ;-)

-- 
David FAURE, david@mandrakesoft.com, faure@kde.org
http://perso.mandrakesoft.com/~david/, http://www.konqueror.org/
KDE, Making The Future of Computing Available Today