KDE4 related comments in 3.5 branch

Kevin Krammer kevin.krammer at gmx.at
Fri Oct 7 12:18:37 BST 2005

On Friday 07 October 2005 12:38, Adriaan de Groot wrote:

> I don't think that we should clutter the apidox with too much porting
> information -- that can go in the porting guide if and when it comes out.


> > That's why I orginally asked about adding @deprecated.
> > However I no longer think this is a good idea. The method in question is
> > not deprecated and even its other variant might not be present in KDE4,
> > heck not even the class it is in.
> We can add another tag if we like: @porting for instance.

That was just an initial thought, but as long as there is no close-to-final 
KDE4 API, it doesn't make any sense, there might be a lot of changes ahead 
that invalidate such a comment.


Kevin Krammer <kevin.krammer at gmx.at>
Qt/KDE Developer, Debian User
Moderator: www.mrunix.de (German), www.qtforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20051007/8495d771/attachment.sig>

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list