Hi. My 0.0.2:
KDE4 is the future (obviously). So, i think we should concentrate on KDE4. Back in May, when we had our big KDE Solaris IRC meeting (#kde-solaris), we decided to focus on KDE4. I would be much more interested in focusing on Nevada and/or OpenSolaris, for no other reasons than: - they deliver more components (many of which are KDE dependencies) - it's easier to integrate new components in Nevada/OpenSolaris than in Solaris - the general idea about the relationship between Solaris and Nevada/OpenSolaris seems to be: New Things(TM) appear in Nevada/OpenSolaris first, then they may (or may not) appear in Solaris. So, i agree with you in principle: Nevada/OpenSolaris is our focus. On the one hand: many of KDE[3|4] dependencies will probably not make it into Solaris: OpenLDAP, MIT Kerberos, Cyrus-SASL2, recent (younger than a year) Net-SNMP, and others. I believe it's very important to have the ability to include these "Big Things" in a Nevada/OpenSolaris distro, and for KDE to use these components as system-installed ones, as opposed to KDE delivering privately installed ones (if you want to see what happens when you start delivering all these components as depenencies, look at Blastwave's package dependency mess). But: many are still using Solaris. If we focus on Nevada/OpenSolaris exclusively, we run the risk of leaving Solaris out, simply because we assume certain components are already in Nevada, but they are not in Solaris. Or, we are telling this userbase "update to Nevada, or you can't build/run KDE". My proposal: let's set a "sunset" Solaris release. In other words, let's say: - we support Solaris 10 Update 4 and up, and Nevada/OpenSolaris - we will support Solaris 10 Update 5 (and continue to support Nevada/OpenSolaris) - at some point in the future, after the release of Solaris 10 Update 5, depending on what components are delivered by S10U5, we'll have to re-evaluate. if S10U5 delivers most of KDE's dependencies, then we no longer have to do anything special for Solaris Updates, and we can just say: either Solaris 10 Update 5, or current Nevada/OpenSoalris will work. If this does not happen, we'll have to make a decision: drop support for "official" Solaris Updates (Update 6, Update 7, etc), or continue supporting them. Continue supporting "official" Solaris Releases means: continue to deliver dependency components, big or small, simply because they are not available in Solaris. Ultimately it's a matter of "who is the indended audience". If the intended audience is made of hackers/developers who do not mind updating their operating system every 3 months, and don't care about things being broken once in a while, then we don't have to worry about Official Solaris Releases. But i'm not sure this is a wise approach. Now about KDE3: i am planning a KDE3 (3.5.8) binary release. --Stefan ------ On Nov 22, 2007 5:46 AM, Lukas Oboril <oboril.lukas at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > let me ask you a question: How is target for mission target KDE > for Solaris ??? > > What would we ? > > KDE 3.5.7 or 3.5.8 for Solaris 10 ??? Opensolaris ??? Solaris 11 ??? > KDE 4 for Solaris 10 ??? Opensolaris ??? Solaris 11 ??? > > I would like to try little bit adjust KBE tools. If will be nevada > builds or next release Solaris only supported (drop solaris 10 and > older), then I can adjust a few things which can be more useful. > > I prefer this way : KDE4 for next Solaris release (Nevada builds). If > anyone would like 3.5.8 then can be, but for nevada builds also. > > I'm sorry, I vote for drop solaris10 (and older) support. > > > best regards > > -- > Lukas Oboril > > When dealing with people, let us remember we are not dealing with > creatures of logic. We are dealing with creatures of emotions, > creatures bristling with prejudices and motivated by pride and vanity. > Dale Carnegie > _______________________________________________ > kde-discuss mailing list > kde-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-discuss > -- Stefan Teleman KDE e.V. stefan.teleman at gmail.com
