Andre Poenitz wrote: > And you do not even try to keep it alive.
I explained the reasons in detail back then. If this is not some random accusation and you are really interested why this was no option anymore go read the archives (thread "Random Notes"). [...] > Now that you look at trac you might as well count the people who needed > to do stuff in qt3 even if they did not want to. You still don't get it. All your arguments including this one and that in your other mail are based on the assumption that there were only two alternatives: full support or removal from trunk. Under this premise I agree completely with the removal, but that is not what has been requested. There was a third alternative that would have solved almost all problems: Keep it in trunk (with no obligation of anyone to touch it), and let those who care do the work to keep it up to date. With that alternative all your arguments are moot. That alternative would of course not have guaranteed that 1.5.0 would be released with qt3. Maybe it would indeed have been too much work to keep it up to date, and it would have been abandoned, but this would then have been the decision of _those who where doing the work_. What happened instead is that _you_ dictated that those should stop or jump through some extra hoops. I am not demanding anyone to agree with my view of the importance (or nonimportance) of the qt3 frontend. I am neither denying the fact that there where some reasons for removal, and that several developers where in favour to remove it. I am however demanding that nobody is perverting the facts. Georg
