On Wednesday 25 July 2001 21:59, Waldo Bastian wrote: > > > In other words: Do we want the changes in KDE 3.0 to be solely > > porting changes, bugfixes and minor feature additions, or do we > > want KDE 3.0 to also include new major features (which could > > possibly delay the 3.0 release, like we experienced with 2.2) ? > > I don't think we should _aim_ for any major new features, but I don't > think we should prevent anything either. We will for sure have delays > with 3.0, just like we have with 2.2. Please note that the 2.2 delays > are hardly due to "major new features" but much more due to "basic > stuff not working". What's about binary compatibilty? KDE 3.0 will break it, but after that the libs should again stay binary compatible for a long time, is this correct? Since major new features tend to break binary compatibility, shouldn't we aim for putting as much new features as possible into KDE 3.0? -- Cornelius Schumacher