State of kdefx

Matthew Woehlke mw_triad at
Wed Aug 1 17:51:50 BST 2007

Mosfet wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 August 2007 11:06:03 am Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> In that case, can we integrate Blitz
>> into KDE's svn, or what? Replacing kdefx (i.e. put it in kdelibs for
>> now) would be the least hassle for others. Any thoughts on making Blitz
>> also static to avoid BC issues when we remove it?
> That's fine as long as non-SVN apps can access it.

What do you mean by "non-SVN apps"? If we move it to kdelibs it will be 
equally accessible as kdefx. Do you mean non-KDE apps should be able to 
use it?

> We definitely want to make 
> sure there are no BC problems because it *will* be replaced by 4.1. Really, 
> however you want to handle the switch is okay with me, I just want to get 
> KImageEffect out of there.

Sounds like static is the way to go, that way we can simply yank it and 
BC won't be affected (but for 4.1 apps will have to either move to 
Quasar or make a conscious choice to import Blitz). It will slow down 
4.1 a little but in the long run seems like the better choice.

"Let's call it an accidental feature." -- Larry Wall

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list