changing KGraphicsUtils?

[Thomas Zander]

On Friday 01 June 2007 00:47:17 Michael Pyne wrote:
> > * We are still / again doing design by committee. We really need
> > usages of the API so we have a set of proper use cases.  I would (re)
> > request that we wait for the codebase to actually gain those before
> > we make decisions on how the method should react.  There just are too
> > many different opinions on what is best.
>
> I thought we already had input from developers saying they needed a
> function like mixColors()?  In the end this is all still about blending
> but the current implementation of blendColors() is apparently still
> lacking. :)

sure, nobody is arguing that.

What is wrong with having _several_ implementations using some blending of 
colors to figure out what the best behavior is?
I'm confused what the big haste is. Why do you guys want to settle this 
_now_?? (which I conclude from  you continuing this thread)

We traditionally have 3 usages of some code before we find something 
eligible to import into KDELibs. For a reason.
I'd really like to know why you guys are resisting the proposed action of 
letting the dust settle for a while now.
-- 
Thomas Zander
-------------- 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/20070601/3179f395/attachment.sig>