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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Developing applications for KDE4
From:       Dirk Stoecker <kde () dstoecker ! de>
Date:       2007-02-03 15:41:29
Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0702031630230.25817 () mudge ! stoecker ! eu
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:

> there is a lot of work going into high level documentation for kde4. we do 
> need more effort there, but i'm happy with the pace of things at the moment. 
> we'll easily eclipse what kde3 had in this regard.

I said that the KDE docs are much better. I agree on that. For the GTK 
1.2 -> 2.0 I feel like standing in the rain. Classes and features are 
removed and nowhere a statement how the replace the stuff.

> > - All this together with bugs that have been fixed in KDE3 and reappear
> >   in KDE4.
> 
> which bugs are these? we have a forward porting policy so this should be kept 
> to an absolute minimum. or is this just hand waving?

Some (most) of these, which are fixed by people who don't run a KDE4 
development. I try to port my bug fixes to trunk, but as I cannot test it 
there this only works, when the structure of the code is nearly the same 
as for 3.5 branch.

Thought I cannot say to what extend this will be a problem, but it exists 
nevertheless.

> the separation is largely symbolic, however, as its the same people working on 
> both. branching is nothing new in the software development world.

I know. And I also know the negative effects of branching. I tend to find 
the "extreme programming" approach better, where larger changes are broken 
down into smaller pieces. You can do major software reworking without 
loosing the possibility to always have one working version. If you agree 
that the seperation is largely symbolic, then you also must agree this 
approach would have worked for KDE as well.

> > but from my point of view and compatibility layer and smooth 
> > transition would have been better.
> 
> the math on the human resources and time required to do this then compare 
> against reality and you'll find out why this doesn't happen.

Smooth transition does not need more, but less resources if done in the 
right way.

Ciao
-- 
http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available)
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]