branch for kdevelop

F@lk Brettschneider gigafalk at
Thu Aug 9 07:27:59 UTC 2001

Roland Krause wrote:
> Eray,
> --- Eray Ozkural <erayo at> wrote:
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Wednesday 08 August 2001 11:45 am, you wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, but in the last months I personaly had the feeling that there
> > was a
> > > split in team.
> Yes, there is a split. I can not speak for the others as to their
> contribution plans. For me, KDevelop2 is about 75% where I need it to
> be. KDevelop3 is about 10%. I can wait a year or maybe two for HEAD to
> get into a usable state, or I can invest a little bit to make it fit a
> bit better over time.
> Additionally, I dont see _any_ development effort in gideon going into
> a direction that is actually interesting for me. I need a decent
> variant of Visual Studio on Unix, that's it for me.
> Agreed, it is easy to underestimate effort in implementing anything in
> KDevelop2, but the code base isnt really as bad as it is often
> depicted.
> > Will John, Falk and all others work on Gideon in the
> > future?
> Ask Falk :-) Oh no, you can probably guess his answer as of now... :-)
> Falks MDI is btw. one of the major reasons for me to throw effort
> behind KDevelop2. MDI provides a more usable interface for me. Others
> strongly disagree. Search the mailing list archives from about February
> this year for the "discussion that ended all discussions" about
> KDevelop. Since then, the developers of HEAD and KDEVELOP_1_4 have
> effectively stopped talking to each other.
> > >
> > Is there some discrepancy between CVS HEAD and KEVELOP_1_4
> > branch
> These are entirely different animals, some things have been ported up,
> most things have not.
> > or is this due to my utter misunderstanding of cvs? (I presume
> > kdevelop-2.x
> > development continues in KDEVELOP_2_BRANCH which has been just
> > created)
> It will probably for a while continue in this branch. I have a list of
> features I plan to implement as time permits. I have considered an
> official fork of the codebase. I still toy with the thought, given the
> fact, that the name KDevelop will go to gideon soon.
> >
> > As far as I've seen making gideon as usable as kdevelop-2.0 should
> > not be too
> > difficult. The parts organization is well thought and gideon can be
> > managed
> > in such a way that it should be possible to work on new features and
> > offer
> > stable releases at the same time, more like mozilla's tree plans.
> > IMHO,
> > further "stability" releases can be made directly from branches off
> > main
> > trunk for better concentration of effort. That is only an idea,
> > though. :)
> Gideon has a better architecture then KDevelop2. It is probably save to
> say that it has gotten close to zero testing and that gideon
> development covers a fairly wide range of interests, reaching from java
> to PHP. The time will hopefully come where I will have to reevaluate my
> point of view towards gideon vs. KDevelop2.

/me 1000% agrees to the whole statement from above.
Some KDevelop-2.x releases can bridge the bigger time gap between a
ready-for-honest-daily-working version 2.0 and the current hacker
version 3.0.

Second, to work for 3.0 assumes that every decision is discussed and
voted before its realization. AND NOT that a main developer is
completely ignored, his work of months is completely removed without the
littlest trial of merging by people who haven't done any work on that
CVS branch. And that time merging was not the problem at all. AND not
that people who just were 2 weeks in the KDevelop project can do CVS
remove actions of a whole tree. AND not that the responsible people do
not say any little sorry about all of that. Concerning that I haven't
heard anything from Bernd Germann until today. All this happened in HEAD
once ago and I moved to the much more considerate KDEVELOP_1_4 group and
I will not move back before those basic things aint sure in any way.
Speaking of architecture Gideon is likely a step forward, speaking of a
team it's chaos hacking.

F at lk

Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free address at

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