branch for kdevelop

Ralf Nolden nolden at
Tue Aug 7 23:31:07 UTC 2001

On Wednesday, 8. August 2001 00:20, Roland Krause wrote:

It should be noted however, that the main development *IS* gideon/HEAD, not 
KDevelop 2 any more. If someone wants to write patches to that or additions 
to a "dead" branch, I can't keep anyone off to do that. So if Roland is 
maintaining that inside the CVS, I'm fine with that and another KDevelop 
bugfix/feature release can be officially  done to support the companies and 
developers who need a fully operational system right away. For new developers 
though who want to work on kdevelop, I suggest to work on gideon. I myself 
will stick to gideon now as well as the 2.0 release was the deadline and will 
be the deadline for the old branch as far as the "big thing" (tm) goes.
So there's actually not a splitting, Roland just wants to spend some time 
hacking up stuff that he thinks didn't get ready for 2.0 and put that in 
place. Whatever everyone pleases.


> Waldo,
> --- Waldo Bastian <bastian at> wrote:
> > Feel free to make a new branch but what about GIDEON then?
> I did try that but failed due to isufficient write permissions to
> /home/kde, maybe my cvs settings are wrong.
> > I thought
> > was supposed to be part of KDE 3.0?
> Afaik, this is still the case. Unfortunately, the group of developers
> has split into two fractions. A few people, including me, have decided
> to integrate kate as the text editor into the current codebase. Ralf
> agreed that this could be released as KDevelop-2.2 in time with
> KDE-2.2.1.
> > If you are now talking about
> > KDevelop 2.1
> > I'm getting this strong feeling that gideon will never be released
> > and die an
> > untimely death.
> I do not think so.
> > You might want to reconsider your priorities.
> No, you dont know what the priorities of the contributing fractions
> are. For example, my priority, to have a functional IDE, that best
> suits my needs is currently best accomplished by improving
> KDevelop-2.0.
> > And why
> > can't
> > you continue to use the KDEVELOP_1_4 branch? Just because of the
> > name?
> I agree, we could, Ralf thinks it is very confusing to use KDEVEOP_1_4
> for new developers, that's why I asked. The more I think about it, the
> more I agree with you to leave the name as it is.
> Thanks for your input,
> Roland
> > Cheers,
> > Waldo
> > --
> > KDE 2.2: We deliver.
> =====
> --
> Roland Krause
> In the garage of life there are mechanics and
> there are drivers. Mechanics wanted!
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger
> -
> to unsubscribe from this list send an email to
> kdevelop-devel-request at with the following body: unsubscribe
> »your-email-address«

We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs.
Ralf Nolden
nolden at

The K Desktop Environment	The KDevelop Project

to unsubscribe from this list send an email to kdevelop-devel-request at with the following body:
unsubscribe »your-email-address«

More information about the KDevelop-devel mailing list