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

List:       kdevelop-devel
Subject:    Re: branch for kdevelop
From:       Roland Krause <rokrau () yahoo ! com>
Date:       2001-08-09 5:17:11
[Download RAW message or body]

Eray,

--- Eray Ozkural <erayo@cs.bilkent.edu.tr> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Wednesday 08 August 2001 11:45 am, you wrote:
> > 
> > Yes, but in the last months I personaly had the feeling that there
> was a
> > split in team. 

Yes, there is a split. I can not speak for the others as to their
contribution plans. For me, KDevelop2 is about 75% where I need it to
be. KDevelop3 is about 10%. I can wait a year or maybe two for HEAD to
get into a usable state, or I can invest a little bit to make it fit a
bit better over time. 

Additionally, I dont see _any_ development effort in gideon going into
a direction that is actually interesting for me. I need a decent
variant of Visual Studio on Unix, that's it for me. 

Agreed, it is easy to underestimate effort in implementing anything in
KDevelop2, but the code base isnt really as bad as it is often
depicted.


> Will John, Falk and all others work on Gideon in the
> future?

Ask Falk :-) Oh no, you can probably guess his answer as of now... :-) 

Falks MDI is btw. one of the major reasons for me to throw effort
behind KDevelop2. MDI provides a more usable interface for me. Others
strongly disagree. Search the mailing list archives from about February
this year for the "discussion that ended all discussions" about
KDevelop. Since then, the developers of HEAD and KDEVELOP_1_4 have
effectively stopped talking to each other. 

> > 

> Is there some discrepancy between CVS HEAD and KEVELOP_1_4
> branch 

These are entirely different animals, some things have been ported up,
most things have not. 

> or is this due to my utter misunderstanding of cvs? (I presume
> kdevelop-2.x 
> development continues in KDEVELOP_2_BRANCH which has been just
> created)

It will probably for a while continue in this branch. I have a list of
features I plan to implement as time permits. I have considered an
official fork of the codebase. I still toy with the thought, given the
fact, that the name KDevelop will go to gideon soon. 

> 
> As far as I've seen making gideon as usable as kdevelop-2.0 should
> not be too 
> difficult. The parts organization is well thought and gideon can be
> managed 
> in such a way that it should be possible to work on new features and
> offer 
> stable releases at the same time, more like mozilla's tree plans.
> IMHO, 
> further "stability" releases can be made directly from branches off
> main 
> trunk for better concentration of effort. That is only an idea,
> though. :)

Gideon has a better architecture then KDevelop2. It is probably save to
say that it has gotten close to zero testing and that gideon
development covers a fairly wide range of interests, reaching from java
to PHP. The time will hopefully come where I will have to reevaluate my
point of view towards gideon vs. KDevelop2. 

Regards
Roland


=====
--
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«


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