[kde-edu]: [Marc.Bartsch@web.de: AW: KGeo and Kig]

[Dominique Devriese]

----- Forwarded message from Marc Bartsch <Marc.Bartsch@web.de> -----

Envelope-to: domi@localhost
Delivery-date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 18:23:12 +0200
From: "Marc Bartsch" <Marc.Bartsch@web.de>
To: "Dominique Devriese" <dominique.devriese@student.kuleuven.ac.be>
Subject: AW: KGeo and Kig
Importance: Normal

Hi Dominique,

Thanks a lot for your kind email. It is quite true that I did not find the
time to further develop KGeo, which is a shame and I do not see myself in a
position to spend any time on it in the near future. As far as the future of
KGeo in the KDEEdu module is concerned, I think that the better application
should be part of the official release. Since it seems that this is yours
;-) I do not mind, if KGeo would be replaced by Kig. For schools, it would
be nice to have a fully developed gemometry application when they buy a
Linux distribution that contains KDE.

So, if you want, just go ahead and replace KGeo. You have my official
blessing. ;-)

And, thanks for keeping my name in the credits of Kig. I hope some of my
sources did really help you. I had much fun developing KGeo and learned a
lot not only about the KDE framework but about C++ programming as such.

Have fun,

Marc.

-----Ursprungliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dominique Devriese
[mailto:dominique.devriese@student.kuleuven.ac.be]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 24. Oktober 2002 20:51
An: marc.bartsch@web.de
Cc: kde-edu@mail.kde.org
Betreff: KGeo and Kig


Hi,

I'm writing you on the subject of your KGeo program and my program
Kig, to know your position on the subject of their respective position
in the KDE-Edu module..

A while ago, i started to work on Kig, as an effort to somehow merge
KGeo and KSeg.  I know now that I had better worked on either
directly, but well, by the time I realised, I was too far to stop..

Anyway, I'm writing you because in the mean time, Kig has improved,
and I think it is getting on par or even better than KGeo.  I have
become involved in the KDE project ( got me a CVS account, and commit
some patches now and then.. ), and I am developing Kig in the
kdenonbeta module.  I have recently done Kig's 0.2 release, and I have
contacted the KDE-Edu contributors about a possible inclusion in the
KDE 3.2 release.  The answer was more or less that since Kig has most
of KGeo's features, it supports its file format, and it has some
features that KGeo doesn't have ( most notably better user response on
construction, macro's, locuses, export to image stuff, xml file
format, KPart integration, better use of the KDE libraries ), and
since it's better maintained ( you have been rather silent lately,
both wrt patches sent to you, and wrt maintenance of your app in KDE
CVS ), Kig will probably be included in KDE-Edu for 3.2.  KGeo will
not be removed as yet, as I would like to wait for user response
before taking such a step, although some have said that it seems not
too good to have both in kde-edu.

What I am writing you about is to know your opinion on the subject.
What do you think about Kig vs. KGeo feature-wise, do you intend to
still maintain KGeo, or can we consider it officially abandoned ?
Would you agree with replacing KGeo with Kig, or are there specific
features you miss ?

Note that the KGeo code has helped me quite a bit in the development
of Kig.  Among other things, the repainting stuff, most of the
objects, the UI etc. are based on it, and your name has been in Kig's
credits since quite a while, and it will remain there.  Consider this
a thank you :)

Please let me know what you think..
domi

--
Dominique Devriese

----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
Dominique Devriese
http://users.pandora.be/frit/domi.gpg