[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:       Shawn Gordon <shawn () thekompany ! com>
Date:       2001-06-19 5:11:26
[Download RAW message or body]

The thing that doesn't make any sense to me at this stage, I haven't heard 
any reason, is why did Waldo ask for Pixie to be removed?  Was there some 
technical reason?

At 09:08 PM 6/18/2001, you wrote:
>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.


Regards,

Shawn Gordon
President
theKompany.com
www.thekompany.com
949-713-3276

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