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

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: about our attitude towards M$ windows
From:       "Dirk A. Mueller" <dmuell () gmx ! net>
Date:       1999-05-29 18:02:08
[Download RAW message or body]

aleXXX <alexander.neundorf@rz.tu-ilmenau.de> wrote:

> First time I wrote to him was short before KDE 1.1 release, so it was
> too late, before 1.1.1 I didn't have very much time,
> so now it could go into 1.1.2.

I don't think so, as KDE 1.1.x translation stuff is freezed, it's
afaik impossible to do such a move without problems, so I believe it
shouldn't be done.

KDE doesn't necessarily mean that everything needs to be in the base
packages. Why can't it be distributed separate ?

> Ok, he did the work to make it compile with Qt 2.0, this was nice.

IIRC I was the one who did that (probably by breaking many other
things), but that doesn't matter.

> To summarize his statements, he said he is not connected to a LAN with
> windows-hosts, all networks he knows are UNIX-ones,
> and he doesn't like the name kNetmon, so why move it from kdenonbeta
> to kdenetwork ?

If it is really only useful for Samba-Users, imho the name should make
clear that it has something to do with samba.

Nevertheless, kdenetwork installs itself as "Internet" subdir in
kpanel, and samba doesn't have much to do with internet-related
services, does it?

> To have success we must support this stuff, it is almost as important 
> as e.g. a good mp3-player for a modern desktop.

It is part of KDE 2.x distribution ?! KDE 1.x is already obsolete, and
there shouldn't be much effort put in beside bugfixes.

> Ok, but kNetmon is working _NOW_ and it also supports NFS and Novell
> Netware, in the future I hope Apletalk too

I'm sorry, but where's the problem distributing this utility separate ?

BTW, it's not very polite to publish emails without asking the writer
for permission _first_.

-- 
Dirk A. Mueller

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