Houston, we have a problem.

[Ingo Klöcker]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 05 September 2002 23:47, Dirk Mueller wrote:
> So, the issue that remains is the question about wether or not his
> patch should be committed for KDE 3.1 or not at this time of the
> release cycle (The fact that it is already in CVS doesn't matter for
> me, it can be reverted at any time once there is a consensus).
>
> This, however, is a conflict that can be solved on a pure technical
> base. If the patch causes more problems than it is worth, it should
> be dropped for 3.1 release. If you think that reviewing and a little
> cooperation could make it work in time for the release, then by all
> means go for it.

See below.

> I very much miss this level of discussion in the
> threads I read on the kmail mailinglist, so I kindly ask you to
> reduce the conflict to this level for now. Please remember that we
> have another public Beta, which could very well be used as a reality
> check for the patch.

We had several public Betas before KDE 3.0 and still KMail 1.4 had a 
very nasty bug in the IMAP code which caused whole folders to be nuked. 
Therefore we tried to be a little bit more careful with the next 
release. Apparently not everybody thinks it's a good idea to postpone 
heavy architecular changes until after KDE 3.1.

> I do understand that it will hardly make you
> detect all possible problems with the patch, but this is always the
> case. If you want to make sure that you don't introduce any new
> problems, better don't change anything in KMail.

Your sarcasm is completely out of place. We improve KMail all the time. 
We just had and still have concerns against this particularly intrusive 
patch.

> If you want to make
> sure that you develop KMail further to make it better than it is
> already, then actually _let_ the code be changed, review and test the
> changes and think about possible problems, and don't waste your time
> on putting more and more energy in this discussion.

We don't have the time to "review, test the changes and think about 
possible problems" because we are trying to fix all the open bug 
reports for KMail before the release of KDE 3.1. That's why we proposed 
to postpone the patch. We already lost enough time trying to convince 
Don of our concerns. We can't afford to spend more of our valuable and 
sparse time for reviewing a patch that we didn't want to have in KDE 
3.1. Fixing already known bugs is IMO currently much more important 
than trying to find newly introduced bugs.

Regards,
Ingo

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9d9zpGnR+RTDgudgRAixHAJ9LQ2y2icnXJNWS6irIBOe+LIEQCQCghVBI
wV6tdRRmND/HVrKmCgLsdPc=
=pu9g
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----