Re: branches/KDE/3.5/kdevelop/lib/astyle

On Friday 21 September 2007 04:54:42 pm Dirk Mueller wrote:
> On Friday, 21. September 2007, Matt Rogers wrote:
> > > b) KDE/3.5/kdevelop/ is now "dead",
i.e. its not the stable KDevelop
> > > anymore (as of 2 or 3 weeks ago). Would you
mind comitting this change
> > > to branches/kdevelop/3.5/ as well?
>
> (sorry did not get the original mail)
>
> Uh boy, I'm entirely sick of kdevelop moving around
where it develops
> something twice per year. if you think you have to
reinvent a new place
> where you develop kdevelop just because you're bored,
then please make sure
> that patches are ported over to your current playground
as well.
>
> > > KDevelop developers: Should we ask the
release-team about removing
> > > branches/KDE/3.5/kdevelop? Also that would
make sure the next KDE
> > > release won't release kdevelop from
branches/KDE/3.5/kdevelop...
>
> Just telling release-team that you don't want to have
kdevelop released
> will fix the issue. and then you can use
branches/KDE/3.5/kdevelop to
> develop whatever you want.
>
> > Sorry, but these changes need to stay since we're
distributing the
> > astyle source code with KDevelop. Having this
pushed up to astyle
> > upstream is nice, but not a requirement.
>
> The stuff is already pushed upstream as astyle fails
compilation too. In
> any case there is probably a reason for kdevelop
including a deep copy of
> astyle instead of using the system installed version,
but it can't be a
> requirement.
>
> Also I agree, you should really decide if you want to
focus on KDevelop4 or
> just play games with branches.
>
>
> Greetings,
>
> Dirk

So, to me, this brings up an interesting thought. Do we
stick with KDE's 
subversion repository, and just tell the release-team
"don't release us" or 
possibly move to our own infrastructure so that we get the
freedom to do 
whatever we want ? 

This is just an idea, don't flame me for it. 
--
Matt


_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On 21.09.07 22:04:24, Matt Rogers wrote:
> On Friday 21 September 2007 04:54:42 pm Dirk Mueller
wrote:
> > Also I agree, you should really decide if you want
to focus on KDevelop4 or
> > just play games with branches.
> 
> So, to me, this brings up an interesting thought. Do we
stick with KDE's 
> subversion repository, and just tell the release-team
"don't release us" or 
> possibly move to our own infrastructure so that we get
the freedom to do 
> whatever we want ? 
> 
> This is just an idea, don't flame me for it. 

I'm actually thinking exactly the same, just not for
KDevelop3 but for
KDevelop4. We don't even need our own infrastructure, we
could just move
KDevelop into KEG and then have our own release cycle just
like other
"major" apps like k3b or amarok.

After all we're not going to be "along" the KDE4
release schedule
anyway (i.e. lagging 1 minor version number behind most
probably).

Andreas

-- 
Good news from afar can bring you a welcome visitor.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel