I´m following the disscution from afar (Chile right now..), I havn´t commited any code for quite sometime and when I´ll come back I´ll probably concentrate on bug fixes - but I feel that the general mood is to accept the offer.<br>
<br>I don´t feel that I should cast a vote on this matter due to the reasons above - but why don´t the krew vote on this issue ? If most people are comfartable with the idea - we can talk about details like saving history and the right point in time to do it later, if the krew rather contiue with the current SVN - than the details are irrelevent :)<br>
<br>Keep up the great work (both on KDE and Krusader),<br>Rafi.<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Sebastian Kügler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sebas@kde.org">sebas@kde.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div class="Ih2E3d">On Tuesday 25 November 2008 23:31:23 Jonas Bähr wrote:<br>
> Since 2.0.0 would be our first KDE-4 release, it would be an<br>
> acceptable point to beginn with a blank history. Sebastian, you<br>
> mentioned "possibly losing history" as a disadvantage. Does this mean<br>
> there is a chance to keep our history? Under which conditions? My svn<br>
> knowledge regarding such migrations is limited, but I could only think<br>
> of a replay of our repository. This does not really make sense....<br>
<br>
</div>As David said (and which might not have made it to the krusader list), it<br>
*might* be possible to import history using svk. But you need to talk to<br>
sysadmin@k.o about that. So I cannot be conclusive here.<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> > i think it has other advantages not mentioned here (mostly from PR<br>
> > perspective), but that aside, i would like to know which module<br>
> > krusader would be getting into. ideally, i'd like to see krusader in<br>
> > a package that usually gets installed by default, which (i *think*)<br>
> > is not the situation with extragear?<br>
><br>
> I think extragear would be perfectly fine, at least for the beginning.<br>
> Some of the most popular KDE apps, like Amarok, live in extragear.<br>
> Plus, there we have the maximum of freedom. We can't claim our<br>
> independence on the one hand and ask for inclusion in a core module on<br>
> the other.<br>
<br>
</div>Well, installed by default is ambiguous. If you're referring to kdebase, I<br>
think that is not an option for Krusader (at least not in the current<br>
situation). We're already shipping two filemanagers with it (while, with KDE4,<br>
we've tried really hard to get the number of apps in the standard modules down<br>
to one per type (i.e. one image viewer, one video player, ...). Extragear, to<br>
*me* sounds like a sensible option indeed, but ultimately it's up to module<br>
maintainers where Krusader can find its home.<br>
<div class="Ih2E3d"><br>
> > what do you think guys?<br>
><br>
> I'm all fo a move as soon as 2.0 is out of the door. What does the<br>
> rest of the Krew think?<br>
<br>
</div><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">Cheers,<br>
--<br>
sebas<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.kde.org" target="_blank">http://www.kde.org</a> | <a href="http://vizZzion.org" target="_blank">http://vizZzion.org</a> | GPG Key ID: 9119 0EF9<br>
<br>
</div></div><br>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)<br>
<br>
iQEcBAABAgAGBQJJLTW2AAoJEGdNh9WRGQ759JcIAIb77OkZcWQTEE43CPoKh4fC<br>
9d2s1SsDPik1r6tCdmwbtoKhyKU4JJLuh+4cVWoOyjEBu79+NENAlo3Ysudn56UV<br>
0BEJBk0+kJauZ0e02ri7nV08+g/EP9cWKVKWMr7KwAP8bW3HRG3CTYSzcybDNUVg<br>
1KmoDXniF7N4J52cH1T5lgShpSiWiUCnLISiZzO5M4i5z2j2sejO1P/mTUhdMHnu<br>
G8m70kiCtZPVOHkR9eH+zMp3zi+0pNWJDxz5fnff5at+2AJ6GkyjU3JFrXRVXo4G<br>
EwIsWBNiqYJgkU3sied04jCinmMEIyeJ0L9x+dpwNTiutMgsrWYkuASeBeFZEhI=<br>
=wvve<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>