Making kdefx static

Allen Winter winter at
Fri Aug 3 22:47:07 BST 2007

On Friday 03 August 2007 5:20:48 pm Matthew Woehlke wrote:
> (meh, forget quoting)
> Ok, summary so far:
> Thiago says we can't have a static kdefx. But we can't have a dynamic 
> kdefx either. So I guess winterz is right; we can't have kdefx :-). I'll 
> see what else transpires over the weekend, and plan to start a 'kdefx 
> going away' thread on Monday (along with a 'please stop using it before 
> then!' plea ;-) - I'll clean up everything I can but I'm gone 
> Thursday-Sunday next week).
> Tom objected to blitz in kdelibs. If we kill kdefx, this is of course 
> right out as both he and winterz have pointed out, plus I agree with his 
> other arguments (about the code being unproven). So I think the question 
> here is, should we still consider adding blitz to kdesupport as a crutch 
> for applications that would really feel the pain otherwise?

I like the idea of having Blitz in kdesupport.
But... only if it is "done" or "nearly done".

And, keep in mind that it will need to follow
the licensing and other requirements (Krazy, BIC).


More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list