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

List:       kdevelop-devel
Subject:    Re: branch for kdevelop
From:       Ralf Nolden <nolden () kde ! org>
Date:       2001-08-07 23:31:07
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wednesday, 8. August 2001 00:20, Roland Krause wrote:

It should be noted however, that the main development *IS* gideon/HEAD, not \
 KDevelop 2 any more. If someone wants to write patches to that or \
additions  to a "dead" branch, I can't keep anyone off to do that. So if \
Roland is  maintaining that inside the CVS, I'm fine with that and another \
KDevelop  bugfix/feature release can be officially  done to support the \
companies and  developers who need a fully operational system right away. \
For new developers  though who want to work on kdevelop, I suggest to work \
on gideon. I myself  will stick to gideon now as well as the 2.0 release \
was the deadline and will  be the deadline for the old branch as far as the \
"big thing" (tm) goes. So there's actually not a splitting, Roland just \
wants to spend some time  hacking up stuff that he thinks didn't get ready \
for 2.0 and put that in  place. Whatever everyone pleases.

Ralf


> Waldo,
> 
> --- Waldo Bastian <bastian@kde.org> wrote:
> > Feel free to make a new branch but what about GIDEON then?
> 
> I did try that but failed due to isufficient write permissions to
> /home/kde, maybe my cvs settings are wrong.
> 
> > I thought
> > GIDEON
> > was supposed to be part of KDE 3.0?
> 
> Afaik, this is still the case. Unfortunately, the group of developers
> has split into two fractions. A few people, including me, have decided
> to integrate kate as the text editor into the current codebase. Ralf
> agreed that this could be released as KDevelop-2.2 in time with
> KDE-2.2.1.
> 
> > If you are now talking about
> > KDevelop 2.1
> > I'm getting this strong feeling that gideon will never be released
> > and die an
> > untimely death.
> 
> I do not think so.
> 
> > You might want to reconsider your priorities.
> 
> No, you dont know what the priorities of the contributing fractions
> are. For example, my priority, to have a functional IDE, that best
> suits my needs is currently best accomplished by improving
> KDevelop-2.0.
> 
> > And why
> > can't
> > you continue to use the KDEVELOP_1_4 branch? Just because of the
> > name?
> 
> I agree, we could, Ralf thinks it is very confusing to use KDEVEOP_1_4
> for new developers, that's why I asked. The more I think about it, the
> more I agree with you to leave the name as it is.
> 
> Thanks for your input,
> Roland
> 
> > Cheers,
> > Waldo
> > --
> > KDE 2.2: We deliver.
> 
> =====
> --
> Roland Krause
> In the garage of life there are mechanics and
> there are drivers. Mechanics wanted!
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
> http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
> 
> -
> to unsubscribe from this list send an email to
> kdevelop-devel-request@kdevelop.org with the following body: unsubscribe
> »your-email-address«

-- 
We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralf Nolden
nolden@kde.org

The K Desktop Environment	The KDevelop Project
http://www.kde.org		http://www.kdevelop.org


-
to unsubscribe from this list send an email to \
kdevelop-devel-request@kdevelop.org with the following body: unsubscribe \
»your-email-address«


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