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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: My statement about the latest flamewar ;-)
From:       Navindra Umanee <navindra () cs ! mcgill ! ca>
Date:       2001-06-19 4:08:21
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi,

Why did you break KDE 2.x backwards compatibility (from a user, and
possibly, developer perspective) during a freeze?  I thought it was
agreed that breaking KDE backwards compatibility is something that
should be left for KDE 3.0?  Maintaining backwards compatibility means
a stable kdelibs/kdebase, and this doesn't seem to be unreasonable.
Respecting a freeze and not finicking with kdelibs/kdebase isn't
something unreasonable either, IMHO.

Could you please consider postponing your change in policy after the
KDE 2.2 release?  It will so simplify the situation, and make many
happier.  I don't see forking and renaming the styles in KDE to be a
solution, unless I suppose there is a wizard to update configuration
files and inform the users of this mess.  It's the users that suffer
either way.

Removing Pixie is much more understandable on the other hand, it never
was part of the core desktop.  Anyway, what do I know.

-N.

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