RFC: Removal of KAutoConfig / KAutoConfigDialog

[Scott Wheeler]

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

On Thursday 13 November 2003 1:07, Benjamin Meyer wrote:
> Because KConfig_Compiler didn't exist six months ago?  Kind of hard to port 
> to something that doesn't exist...

I was referring to the stuff as recently as Monday where you were "portion to 
KAutoConfig".  And this is in light of the fact that even before the feature 
freeze I expressed disaccord with porting working code from KConfig to 
KAutoConfig just for the hell of it; it makes less sense now.

This is primarily what frustrated me and why I brought this back up.  It 
certainly seemed as if you had chosen to ignore the concensus here and were 
continuing to port things to a deprecated API.  (And all of the arguments 
about it being "on the way" to the newer stuff don't impress me.  At this 
point in the cycle it means replacing code that we can release with code that 
we won't.)

- -Scott

p.s. There's no need to CC me.  I've been on the list for a while.  :-)

- -- 
Audience Member: "What is the book [on CS] that you most want to read?"
Donald Knuth: "It's not `The Art of Computer Programming for Dummies.`"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/s0VDQu0ByfY5QTkRAnF4AJ9YJMTwR5JFatEbrzQd+TZrk4wP9ACfZ1cC
YW1QYGdYgc7PweMXgAL7Fdg=
=61oz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----