NOW THE COMPROMIZE! (was: Re: A common roadmap)

[Falk Brettschneider]

Matthias Hölzer-Klüpfel wrote:

>On Tuesday 02 April 2002 11:45, gigafalk at yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>>Perhaps some of you have read Joel Spolsky's articles about rewriting
>>>software. If not, I'd encourage you to do so. In particular, these two:
>>>
>>>Things you should never do, Part I:
>>>http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000069.html
>>>
>>>What to do instead:
>>>http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000348.html
>>>
>
>Hm, I am not sure he is completely right outside the close-source world, but 
>his arguments are usefull sometimes.
>
>They would be especilly usefull if the alleged, but imho not correct, 
>assumption would hold, that gideon is only 10% of what KDevelop2 is right 
>now. For my day-to-day work, which means being able to do development in C++, 
>C and Java, gideon seems a lot closer than KDevelop2.
>
>
>>The current situation reminds me of a neverending stalemate in a chess
>>game. We discussed about the suggestion of porting the Gideon plugins over
>>to the stable core of KDevelop2.2 and meanwhile MHK worked and improved the
>>Gideon core by adding the QextMDI feature. A pretty nice piece of work (I
>>salute MHK) but it again divides both KDevelop parties. Maybe if we don't
>>find a solution now a cvs split of the team and of the cvs modules (in
>>cvs-module gideon, kdevelop and kdevbase) is better for the whole KDevelop
>>project?
>>
>
>Well, some here say that gideon is missing the KTextEditor interface, so I 
>added them. The next argument was it was missing the QextMdi interface, so I 
>added it. Now you say, this is deepening the split.
>
>Could we have a simple poll? How many people would say that they would never 
>work on gideon, whatever it's technical features would be? I have the feeling 
>that would make the whole situation a bit clearer.
>
>I think splitting the effort is a waste. If the team decides to stay with the 
>KDevelop2 line, I think we should simply discontinue the gideon development. 
>I don't have any interest working on a project that noone else is interested 
>in. If you all think this is the faster way to something usefull for non-C++ 
>developers, maybe I should just wait a year and have a look at it again.
>
Don't worry Matthias, I wrote a bit agressive just to get answers also 
from "silent" Gideon people here for the discussion. I'm happy you also 
don't want to split in spite of your latest commits.
So now it seems clear to all of us that we'll put kdevelop2.2 and gideon 
together in one cvs HEAD.

So be it. Amen.
Ciao
F at lk

P.S.:
The future:
If development of one of the two subdirs for Gideon and 2.2 dies within 
the next 4 month, can we confirm to remove it from HEAD (maybe just move 
it to a branch)?



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com