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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: A proposal to deal with the current RedHat situation
From:       Klas Kalass <klas.kalass () gmx ! de>
Date:       2002-09-02 5:38:10
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Montag, 2. September 2002 01:01 schrieb Neil Stevens:
> On Sunday September 01, 2002 05:07, Joseph Wenninger wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > On Sunday 01 September 2002 22:00, Neil Stevens wrote:
> > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > Hash: SHA1
> > >
> > > On Sunday September 01, 2002 07:59, Shawn Gordon wrote:
> > > > *Someone* just needs to decide what version of Qt, KDE, gcc, etc.,
> > > > make up this official version.
> > >
> > > The official version of KDE is source.
> > >
> > > Further, KDE is portable, so there cannot be one fixed compiler and
> > > dependent libraries that make up the official installation.
> >
> > Why should KDE's portability be a problem in that case ? You can specify
> > for each distribution or operating system a certain set of library
> > versions, compiler options, ....
> >
> > At least for the most common ones.
>
> That it would only be for the most common ones is exactly the problem.  F=
or
> Shawn it's no big deal, since a proprietary software vendor has to narrow
> down his supported platforms for practical reasons.  For KDE, having
> previously been portable through shipping source, it's a huge step
> backwards.
>
> KDE will sudddenly be telling the world that you can only be "official" if
> you use something that is one of the common OSes.  Instead of letting the
> public face be the portable autoconfed code, KDE will be trumpeting some
> OSes and neglecting others.
KDE would still deliver the source as well, no?

 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]