From kde-pim  Tue May 09 13:44:46 2006
From: Ingo =?iso-8859-1?q?Kl=F6cker?= <kloecker () kde ! org>
Date: Tue, 09 May 2006 13:44:46 +0000
To: kde-pim
Subject: Re: [Kde-pim] Yet another SOC idea
Message-Id: <200605091544.53181 () helena ! mathA ! rwth-aachen ! de>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-pim&m=114718233908818
MIME-Version: 1
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="--===============1073012200=="

--===============1073012200==
Content-type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary=nextPart5486778.AEPQZdMNRL
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

--nextPart5486778.AEPQZdMNRL
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Am Samstag, 6. Mai 2006 16:46 schrieb Aron Bostr=F6m:
> On 6.5.06, Till Adam wrote:
> > you'll have to decide whether you want to work on top of the stable
> > and reliable 3.5 codebase, and then maybe port to KDE4 later on, or
> > help develop and shape KDEPim4.0/Akonadi itself directly.
>
> It was my intention to submit my project application today (
> http://www.forumscaniae.net/soc/index.php/Brief_Project_Plan), but
> now I am unsure on how to proceed.
>
> From my point of view, the project application I'm about to submit
> (GMail conversation style mode for KMail) mostly concerns changes in
> the Graphical User Interface, which in my opinion should require less
> dependency upon a changing/non-existent Akonadi. Of course, it would
> still be unusable and hard to develop without some way to store and
> retrieve e-mails.
>
> Now, should I reevaluate my project plan and rewrite my project plan
> for this?
>
> As I see it, I have three options:
> 1) Stick with my initial plan to develop for KDE 4. And back port
> changes to KDE 3.5 for users' input. When SoC ends, keep on
> maintaining my project until KDE 4 is released.
> 2) Develop for KDE 3.5 and when SoC ends port it to KDE 4 and
> maintain it until KDE 4 turns final.
> 3) Develop for KDE 4 alongside helping out with Akonadi. When SoC
> ends, continue implementing less priority left-over features.
>
> Either is fine with me, but which should I choose? Or should I make
> my plan severely less detailed and state that details will be worked
> out when I have reached a decision following consultation with my
> mentor?

I think option 1) is okay. At least, if you intend to show the=20
conversation in the message window/pane which won't change that=20
dramatically between KDE 3 and KDE 4. OTOH, the message list will most=20
likely have to be completely rewritten using a clean model-view=20
approach.

Regards,
Ingo

--nextPart5486778.AEPQZdMNRL
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBEYJzVqUQWN/hplRsRAqs7AKDNxN36+RpEo2jynE9dVeDlHIilJgCfcW7C
ShbsDZ5Mesmos/rEII6RyrQ=
=PPQL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--nextPart5486778.AEPQZdMNRL--


--===============1073012200==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
kde-pim mailing list
kde-pim@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
kde-pim home page at http://pim.kde.org/
--===============1073012200==--