glib dependancy in KDE3.x
kretz at kde.org
Fri Mar 7 17:25:55 GMT 2003
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Friday March 7 2003 18:14, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> On Friday 07 March 2003 17:04, Stefan Westerfeld wrote:
> > In fact, I am convinced that some things should be implemented in C. And
> > I am convinced that some things are implemented best using a main loop.
> > Thus I'd say that a user which commits himself to the irrational policy
> > of using only C++ applications and only C++ code, for the sake of
> > attaining some higher goal that I don't know of, should not be supported
> > optimally by KDE.
> You can't be serious here. "irrational policy of using only C++" ??
Hey, he said "irrational policy of using only C++ applications". There's a big
difference here. Because that is irrational... (well at least IMHO)
> > I think KDE should promote tolerance and understanding where we can, and
> > this is a place where we can promote understanding of what programming
> > languages and code sharing are really for.
> How about promoting a working, stable desktop and development platform,
> available in a limited amount of time ?
Sounds good is there anyone saying anything against that?
The question was if it's ok to depend on glib instead of copying glib into
And so far I have not seen a single good argument for keeping the situation
like it is now - except for those who think that this dependency will mean
more work for them (I don't really count that as a "good" argument though :).
Matthias Kretz (Germany) <><
MatthiasKretz at gmx.net, kretz at kde.org,
Matthias.Kretz at urz.uni-heidelberg.de
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the kde-core-devel