On Friday, November 11, 2011 16:50:00 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Friday 11 November 2011, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > note that the decisions which i am simply repeating and asking people to > > respect were made this past summer in a meeting of some 30 libs > > contributors and then brought here to k-c-d for further discussion. to > > ignore would be disrespectful of the time honoured principles in KDE. > > I'd prefer if there wouldn't be a separate mailing list for the frameworks > effort, but if it would use k-c-d instead. IMO this _is_ kde core > development. This would make it more public (yes, it is completely public, > but still a bit hidden if you didn't subscribe the frameworks list).
you might be right. the concerns that were raised was that k-c-d has gotten pretty noisy and at times the place where the proverbial peanut gallery comes to hang out ;) i'm not sure a separate list was the best idea, however it the signal-to-noise ratio was the motivation. > > * Qt5 is not Qt4: it isn't a huge burdon to port things over. the code and > > API is essentially the same. > > > > * we aren't going for "add lots of huge new functionality blocks" (e.g. > > solid, phonon, threadweaver, sonnet, etc. etc. etc.); this is a > > maintenance reorganization, an opportunity to merge functionality into Qt5 > > ... and into CMake, which is making good progress btw. :-) yes i've been sort-of-kind-of following that and its looking pretty promising indeed! :) integrated automoc ftw... -- Aaron J. Seigo humru othro a kohnu se GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.