| 1 |
Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 6 Jan 2010, at 18:57, Dale wrote: |
| 4 |
>> Stroller wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> On 5 Jan 2010, at 23:33, Dale wrote: |
| 6 |
>>>> ... |
| 7 |
>>>> Gentoo wasn't at fault here. KDE was the one that dropped the |
| 8 |
>>>> ball. Gentoo had to follow the knuckle heads at KDE tho. |
| 9 |
>>> |
| 10 |
>>> Between KDE & Gentoo, aren't most contributors volunteers? In |
| 11 |
>>> volunteer development it's normal & necessary to focus on the |
| 12 |
>>> features that one needs most. I can really understand KDE's position |
| 13 |
>>> that downstream distros - Red Hat & Canonical both have paid |
| 14 |
>>> developers - can continue maintenance on a codebase that is no |
| 15 |
>>> longer receiving their primary attention. |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> So, KDE is maintaining KDE 3.5? If KDE is/was maintaining KDE 3.5 |
| 18 |
>> then Gentoo would still have it in the tree. If KDE is not |
| 19 |
>> supporting KDE 3.5 then Gentoo has to drop it, as things break and |
| 20 |
>> develop security issues. Again, this is not Gentoo's fault for not |
| 21 |
>> developing KDE 3.5, it is KDE that dropped it. What Redhat does most |
| 22 |
>> likely won't affect what Gentoo does. I don't use Redhat but I do |
| 23 |
>> use Gentoo. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Where did I say KDE is maintaining KDE 3.5? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
That was the question. Saying that Redhat or someone else is |
| 28 |
maintaining KDE is not the same as KDE maintaining it. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> If you want to find "fault", Dale, it's your fault for using free |
| 32 |
> software you're not prepared to maintain. The source code is there - |
| 33 |
> fix any bugs you have problems with. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
My fault? I don't develop any software so is everything else my fault too? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
>> I'm also pretty sure that Gentoo doesn't do development work on |
| 40 |
>> Gnome, Fluxbox, Apache, MySql and other packages. They just make |
| 41 |
>> ebuilds and put them in the tree so people can use them. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> I'm pretty sure you don't do development work on X, Y or Z, either. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> I'm all for attributing blame when devs make decisions I disagree |
| 46 |
> with, but this is simply a matter of limited resources. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> I hope my above statements don't sound nasty, but you want 3.5, Alan |
| 49 |
> [1] wants KDE 4. The various developers upstream of you and Alan - |
| 50 |
> i.e. both KDE and Gentoo - don't have time to work on both. So they |
| 51 |
> have each chosen where to spend their time, and that's on KDE 4. |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> Sorry if you don't like it - this wasn't my decision, I'm just trying |
| 54 |
> to explain. Either you or Alan are going to be disappointed that your |
| 55 |
> preferred version doesn't get the attention you would like it to. |
| 56 |
> Sorry it had to be you. |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> Stroller. |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
> [1] Some hypothetical Alan who does not really exist. |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
And I'm sorry that they made the decision they made too. Thing about |
| 66 |
software, no one can force someone to use it. With windoze, you get IE |
| 67 |
whether you like it or not. You don't really have a *easy* choice |
| 68 |
there. If I don't like KDE, I can switch to something else. With |
| 69 |
things brealing like they are, that day may come. |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
This point has been discussed a lot on the KDE mailing list. KDE |
| 72 |
dropped support for KDE 3.5. It wasn't Gentoo that dropped it. It |
| 73 |
wasn't any other distro either, it was KDE. Sorry you want to blame me |
| 74 |
or someone else for their decisions. |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
Dale |
| 77 |
|
| 78 |
:-) :-) |
Archives