Reminder: commit major changes to branches/work/kde4 in addition to /trunk

[Max Howell]

Dan Meltzer wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I've been playing around with the kde4 port, and while I don't expect it to 
> work, I did notice that a lot of the major recent changes since the split 
> were not committed to both, the major one I'm thinking of is moodbar being 
> deleted.
> 
> It seems like it would make sense to commit them at the same time, and keep 
> the code-base fairly similar, in order to make it easier in the future to do 
> porting.

The port was never planned to be started, so we never arranged a policy. 
Really it shouldn't have been started, because as you point out, we now 
have a lack of syncronisation.

I'm sure sebr will be delighted to spend another 2 hours surgically 
removing moodbar from amaroK 2.

OTOH I'm sure many others will be delighted that moodbar has magically 
reappeared in amaroK 2! ;-)

Since we have the port, the main problem is most developers don't have 
kdelibs4/qt4/amarok2 checked out or compiled, and I think it's harsh to 
expect people to.

But anyway, a lot of stuff will have to be rewritten completely for 2, 
ie you can't avoid it for important stuff with a listview (playlist, 
playlist browser, collection browser), and we made great plans for 
making core components much better for 2, which requires basically a 
rewrite.

So quite possibly keeping the branches in sync will be a waste of effort 
anyway. We'll have to reimplement a lot of features when we get round to 
doing more to amaroK 2 than making it 1.4 based on Qt4/KDE4.

Eventually we'll all have an amaroK 2 checkout, so eventually we may 
have less sync issues to worry about. But for now I don't know what to 
suggest. My opinion is: don't worry about it, but perhaps we should keep 
a document of bug fixes that shouldn't be lost etc.

Max