glib in kdesupport: yes or no?
manyoso at yahoo.com
Mon Mar 10 17:48:45 GMT 2003
On Monday 10 March 2003 01:20 am, Stefan Westerfeld wrote:
> Do you see why you're making no sense here? You're implicitely projecting
> a "we" "they" split on the world in every word you say and every thought
> you have. This can not help. If you want KDE and GNOME to interoperate
> really well, consider them as the same thing, and put your workforce in
> doing things that are ideal for both projects, not only for one of this.
> Give up your identity as GNOME developer (where as GNOME is somewhat
> implicitely defined by "a desktop that has been written to avoid KDE due to
> licensing issues"), and become a KDE developer as well. Ultimately consider
> these two things the same thing. Then you will work as person who benefits
> both projects, and will gain the reputation that you need to really
> guarantee interoperability.
> If you win support in GNOME but not in the KDE, nothing will happen. If you
> win support in KDE, but not in GNOME, nothing will happen. You can forget
> working on interoperability without support and reputation. So work equally
> concentrated on attaing this within KDE as you work on attaining this in
Oh please no. Havoc is a GNOME and RedHat developer and let's not pretend
otherwise. Trying to change the language is not a good way to win or
convince anyone and it is very suspicious. I don't like it when MS starts
talking about 'Shared Source' or Palladium^err Next Generation blah blah and
I don't see any reason to start talking like KDE and GNOME are the same.
They are not. Different goals, histories, designs, ideas, motivations and
people. IMO, suggestions like this and saying GNOME and KDE are already the
same really make things harder.
More information about the kde-core-devel