Rant: So you want help?

Thomas Friedrichsmeier thomas.friedrichsmeier at ruhr-uni-bochum.de
Fri Nov 5 16:27:44 CET 2010


On Friday 05 November 2010, Patrick Spendrin wrote:
> Also we invested quite some time into this, which would be totally
> useless if we chose to stay with one compiler.

just for clarification (once again): 
I do not advocate changing anything about compiler support in emerge. I can 
absolutely see the merit of having several compilers, there.
I do advocate changing something about the end-user side of things, i.e. the 
KDE windows installer. And of course about the barriers towards creating a 

> The compiler discussion is old already, and it won't be solved any time
> soon. So let's try to focus on the other problems first.

Yeah, I know, I'm late to the party. But BTW, if I'm not mistaken this is 
another example of a discussion that should have been had on the list, instead 
of behind the scenes.

Anyway, so what about the more moderate variant of my suggestion: Chop the 
installer (and release) into different *independent* incarnations, one for each 
compiler. At least it would make it easier to break up the monumental task of 
creating a release into something more managable.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-windows/attachments/20101105/2c67aa6b/attachment.sig 

More information about the Kde-windows mailing list