From kde-devel Thu May 20 21:46:59 1999 From: Simon Hausmann Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 21:46:59 +0000 To: kde-devel Subject: Re: mico 2.2.6 X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-devel&m=92723617619483 On Thu, 20 May 1999, David Faure wrote: > On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 10:49:41PM +0200, Simon Hausmann wrote: > > On Thu, 20 May 1999, David Faure wrote: > > > > > On Thu, May 20, 1999 at 07:29:33PM +0200, Harri Porten wrote: > > > > Hi ! > > > > > > > > Simon Hausmann wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 19 May 1999, Cristian Tibirna wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I have mico-2.2.6 for 5 weeks already. How can I help (what pieces of code > > > > > > will need fixes and will not get people work on it)? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your offer :) > > > > > > > > > > One thing comes to my mind: > > > > > > > > > > Help us finishing kded :) > > > > > > > > > > Most stuff is working fine already, but I think it needs some > > > > > polishing and testing. > > > > > > > > I wanted to mention that I just started to "try to understand" the KOM, > > > > OpenParts etc. stuff as well. Since kded is certainly not the easiest > > > > part to begin with I'll concentrate on easier tasks first. > > > > > > > > I switched to mico-2.2.6 yesterday. Are the compile errors in > > > > kdelibs/corba the problems you were talking about ? > > > > > > Those problems are 'simple' porting stuff, which Steffen and Simon have > > > already done on their hdd. When they say "we all switch", I suppose > > > they will also commit the necessary changes. > > > > No problem, I'm ready to commit _ALL_ necessary changes. > > > > > The problem is not that, but kded still not working well, so object > > > trading would be broken. Perhaps we should apply those changes in a branch > > > (like MICO_2_2_6) so that more people can test it with 2.2.6 ? > > > Or this is stupid and let's simply switch and temporary lose embedding... > > > Don't know. > > > > Wellwell, *I* don't really care and know ;-) > > > > *If* everyone agrees I can commit all stuff. > > > > But in somehow I don't like the extra-branch idea very much. Just my > > personal taste :) , I think it's a little bit confusing. > > > > So IMO: _WHEN_ switching, then let's switch really, withouth an extra tag. > > > > And: Switching now makes integrating kded easier IMO, since it wouldn't > > require an all-in-one-really-huge commit, which would then include, beside > > the mico porting stuff for kdelibs/konqy/koffice, also _all_ (upcoming) > > changes with some .desktop files for the services, so that the trader is > > able to find some koffice plugins and stuff _and_ the changes in > > libkofficecore to call the trader+activator in kded. > > > > It's not my decision :) . I can commit all stuff *now* (tonight) _or_ at > > the end of the next week (because I'll have no net-access the next > > week ). > > ok, ok .. > > I would say "let's switch", but be prepared for tons of bug reports on koffice@ :)) Hehe, ok :-) commit done > How long do you think before kded is ready (in the sense that it can replace > koffice's trader ?) Hm, I don't want to make false promises... ;-) I think kded isn't very far from being ready as replacement for kotrader. Perhaps we can finish it at the end of the next week (when I'm back) . But then we need to finish the directory-for-some-services issue I think. > I don't think we all need to say "yes" to the switch. Let's simply say that if nobody > objects (and it doesn't seem that anybody objects) then we'll switch asap. now it's too late anyway ;-) > /me is glad that he didn't use embedded stuff in his kpresenter demo, > ready for the French Linux Expo :) Coool! > So : just announce the switch, commit the changes, and update the minimum mico version > required in the configure.in[.in] scripts. Did all that stuff, I hope I didn't forget anything. Ciao, Simon -- Simon Hausmann http://www.kde.org/