How did akregator come into kdepim?

[Cornelius Schumacher]

On Sunday 12 December 2004 16:44, George Staikos wrote:
> On Sunday 12 December 2004 07:08, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
> >
> > You should have talked to the kdepim people before doing this. It's
> > completely unacceptable to have a discussion on the mailing lists
> > with a clear agreement how to proceed and then privately do
> > something different.
>
>    More unacceptable than breaking the build?

Come on, fixing the build doesn't prevent you from sending a mail 
explaining the reasons for moving akgregator to kdepim. It probably 
would also have been more efficient to ask for help instead of just 
committing stuff.

Moving applications around affects a lot of developers. This has to be 
discussed openly.

>    What does it matter if 
> the app is in that module or another?  Honestly?

It's a matter of dependencies and sharing code. I don't think it is a 
good solution to have knewsticker and akregator in different modules. 
Because we don't allow dependencies between kdepim and kdenetwork this 
prevents sharing code between these two apps. I honestly think that 
this is a bad idea.

> "PIM Developers" 
> (what does that mean anyway?  I contributed heavily there over time
> too...)

kde-pim at kde.org is a pretty good representation of the kdepim 
developers.

> don't like to have other peoples' code in the same 
> subdirectory as theirs?  I don't see any other issue.

kdepim is more than just a collection of subdirectories. It's also a 
community and communication is an important aspect of this community. 
If you want to be part of kdepim it would be nice if you would also try 
to see this aspect.

By the way, I don't say that I don't want to have akregator in kdepim. I 
personally think that it is a nice addition to kdepim and said that 
before. But there also were objections and these have to be taken 
seriously.

>    I spent plenty of time trying to integrate into kdenetwork and
> when the real problem was discovered I had to move it again.  I
> *tried* to do what was the concensus on that mailing list, and it
> proved impossible.

How did it work when akregator was in kdenonbeta?

>    No it isn't.  The librss in akregator is a largely modified fork
> and it will never be re-merged as-is.  See the other thread on k-c-d
> about it.

I think it's wrong to have different forks of the same library in KDE 
CVS. I didn't find a good reason why there can't be a shared library in 
the thread on the mailing list. What's the reason for this?

-- 
Cornelius Schumacher <schumacher at kde.org>