Closing the arts product in

Matt Rogers mattr at
Sun Jan 13 19:41:15 GMT 2008

On Jan 13, 2008, at 1:23 PM, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:

> On Sunday 13 January 2008, Matt Rogers wrote:
>> Who said that i was going to treat the unmaintained parts of kde 3
>> differently? I also intend to do the same thing with the kicker and
>> kdesktop products since those no longer exist in KDE 4.
>> However, since we're going to be releasing KDE 3.5.9 soon, then I
>> will wait on doing this a bit longer.
> this is precisely why i suggested we have a *separate* b.k.o  
> repository for
> kde4 on. it avoids this whole mess. all kde4 bugs could have gone  
> into the
> kde4 b.k.o (pointed to from and all the legacy bugs,  
> which have
> various amounts of value to different people and situations, could  
> remain
> exactly where they were both for reference and for triages in  
> or whatever.
> of course, since i'm not the one doing the admin work,  
> i really
> didn't press the issue much =)

IMHO, the only thing that having a separate bugzilla does is raise  
the barrier to entry (which bugzilla do i look at?), make things more  
complicated (e.g., bug in kde 4 that dupes one in kde 3), and causes  
more administration time (two bugzillas instead of just one, double  
the accounts, etc). The only benefit that it seems to provide is to  
separate the kde 3 bugs from the kde 4 bugs, which we can with the  
new version of bugzilla. The benefit of that is a bit dubious since  
we can exploit some features of the new bugzilla and get exactly the  
same thing.

Care to add any other benefits that I missed? I may not have the  
whole picture.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list