| 1 |
Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 5 Jan 2010, at 23:33, Dale wrote: |
| 4 |
>> ... |
| 5 |
>> Gentoo wasn't at fault here. KDE was the one that dropped the ball. |
| 6 |
>> Gentoo had to follow the knuckle heads at KDE tho. |
| 7 |
>> Dale |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Between KDE & Gentoo, aren't most contributors volunteers? In |
| 10 |
> volunteer development it's normal & necessary to focus on the features |
| 11 |
> that one needs most. I can really understand KDE's position that |
| 12 |
> downstream distros - Red Hat & Canonical both have paid developers - |
| 13 |
> can continue maintenance on a codebase that is no longer receiving |
| 14 |
> their primary attention. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Stroller. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
So, KDE is maintaining KDE 3.5? If KDE is/was maintaining KDE 3.5 then |
| 20 |
Gentoo would still have it in the tree. If KDE is not supporting KDE |
| 21 |
3.5 then Gentoo has to drop it, as things break and develop security |
| 22 |
issues. Again, this is not Gentoo's fault for not developing KDE 3.5, |
| 23 |
it is KDE that dropped it. What Redhat does most likely won't affect |
| 24 |
what Gentoo does. I don't use Redhat but I do use Gentoo. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I'm also pretty sure that Gentoo doesn't do development work on Gnome, |
| 27 |
Fluxbox, Apache, MySql and other packages. They just make ebuilds and |
| 28 |
put them in the tree so people can use them. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Dale |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
:-) :-) |
Archives