From kde-devel Tue Aug 05 11:09:48 2003 From: Helio Chissini de Castro Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2003 11:09:48 +0000 To: kde-devel Subject: Re: checking for GTK and glib in configure.in.in ? X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-devel&m=106008192826549 Arghh... Last message was for Henrique.. Please don't blame me to reply wrong in portuguese !!! On Tuesday 05 August 2003 08:05, Helio Chissini de Castro wrote: > Oi Henrique.. > > Fazendo amigos ? :-) > > Só não se assuste co o Coolo, porque ele é osso duro de roer mesmo. Não é > ele que é meio mal educado contigo, ele é com todo mundo. Mas é natural. O > pessoal já acostumou. > > Eu to indo pra Nové Hrady, tu tens alguma coisa pra levar pra lá ( idéias, > sugestões de tudo ). Tando lá, eu vou poder bater o pé junto com os caras.. > > []'s > > On Monday 04 August 2003 21:02, Henrique Pinto wrote: > > Hi, > > > > First of all, I must apologize everyone here for my involvement in the > > useless discussion this issue turned into. > > > > This is my last post to this thread. > > > > This thread started over as a question on how to check if GTK+ and GLib > > are installed. It is a legitimate question, and was referring, since > > them, to a "soft" dependency on these libraries. > > > > Then, James Richard Tyrer said: > > >I think that is reasonable to assume that many users have the libraries > > >that are needed to use The GIMP. > > > > In the way it was written, this is a true statement. Most KDE users are > > likely to have GTK+ and GLib "runtime libraries" installed in their > > system, but many do not. But it was referring to the development packages > > of these libraries, what made the statement untrue. Assuming that > > everyone has GTK libraries and development files installed means creating > > a hard dependency on GTK, what is unacceptable for KDE (I don't think > > this needs any explanation.) > > > > This has nothing to do with the original question of Reinhold Kainhofer, > > concerning the detection of the availability of GTK+ and GLib in > > configure.in.in, for a "soft" dependency. > > > > After this message, the thread became a flame war. Many skilled and > > recognized KDE contributors were offended, what is a shame for the KDE > > community (actually, getting involved in something such as this is also a > > shame, and because of that I beg the KDE community to forgive me for > > doing that). > > > > Some messages ahead, James Richard Tyrer wrote: > > "Probably because Zach, and others, want to have the last word rather > > than take responsibility for their errors.", > > > > what is a clear and personal offense to Zack Rusin, and to all the > > "others" he has mentioned. Words such as these are a discourtesy for the > > community, so we'd better stop this thread here. > > > > And my two last points: > > > > #1: James, I do not hate you, but I think your last attitudes are leading > > people to do so. I am not here to judge you, nor do I have competence for > > that, but I ask you to think about your latest words. You may find that > > some of them were unnecessary, and only caused bad things. This may, of > > course, be caused by cultural differences, but I don't think many people > > like the way (and the things) you write. > > > > #2: Stephan Kulow: yes, by re-reading all this thread for the 220th time, > > I found it to be really stupid, and I'm ashamed of myself for being > > involved in it. But the discussion was never on whether I would use or > > not the plugin. I did not said why I refuse to install GTK+, as this is a > > very personal thing and would only make this stupid discussion even more > > stupid. But creating a hard dependency on GTK+ for KDE, as proposed, was > > something I could not accept. Again, I ask you and the whole KDE > > community to forgive me for my last acts. > > > > Thank you all for reading this. -- Helio Castro KDE Developer Development Conectiva S.A. >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<