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

List:       kmail-devel
Subject:    Re: Stuff I'm working on
From:       Neil Stevens <neil () qualityassistant ! com>
Date:       2002-09-10 18:53:16
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday September 10, 2002 11:45, Karl-Heinz Zimmer wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 September 2002 20:10, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > On Tuesday 10 September 2002 11:59, Karl-Heinz Zimmer wrote:
>
> (...)
>
> > > Am I the only one understanding this the way that Don would _like_
> > > to 'have to' fork?
> >
> > i don't think anyone would LIKE to have a fork. if it become
> > absolutely necessary, though, you will discover that some people are
> > willing to support it.
>
> I am taking you seriously: IMHO The above says that you are willing
> to contribute something valuable by taking into account that there _is_
> the official KMail HEAD branch and that working on the branch would
> lead to difficulties at merge-time if the official HEAD were ignored
> during your branch planing and implementation.

What makes HEAD more "official" than any other branch?  KDE releases aren't 
like some medieval monarchy, bequeathing some Divine Right on their 
applications.

- -- 
Neil Stevens - neil@qualityassistant.com
"I always cheer up immensely if an attack is particularly wounding
because I think, well, if they attack one personally, it means they
have not a single political argument left." - Margaret Thatcher
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9fj+cf7mnligQOmERApP4AJ4r69jLniCMCyOl2U9kz0jHkJIVEwCfR67r
koia4vKtS812fumVTGc+LOc=
=kJu6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
KMail Developers mailing list
kmail@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]