branches/KDE/3.5/kdevelop/lib/astyle

[Matt Rogers]

On Friday 21 September 2007 04:54:42 pm Dirk Mueller wrote:
> On Friday, 21. September 2007, Matt Rogers wrote:
> > > b) KDE/3.5/kdevelop/ is now "dead", i.e. its not the stable KDevelop
> > > anymore (as of 2 or 3 weeks ago). Would you mind comitting this change
> > > to branches/kdevelop/3.5/ as well?
>
> (sorry did not get the original mail)
>
> Uh boy, I'm entirely sick of kdevelop moving around where it develops
> something twice per year. if you think you have to reinvent a new place
> where you develop kdevelop just because you're bored, then please make sure
> that patches are ported over to your current playground as well.
>
> > > @KDevelop developers: Should we ask the release-team about removing
> > > branches/KDE/3.5/kdevelop? Also that would make sure the next KDE
> > > release won't release kdevelop from branches/KDE/3.5/kdevelop...
>
> Just telling release-team that you don't want to have kdevelop released
> will fix the issue. and then you can use branches/KDE/3.5/kdevelop to
> develop whatever you want.
>
> > Sorry, but these changes need to stay since we're distributing the
> > astyle source code with KDevelop. Having this pushed up to astyle
> > upstream is nice, but not a requirement.
>
> The stuff is already pushed upstream as astyle fails compilation too. In
> any case there is probably a reason for kdevelop including a deep copy of
> astyle instead of using the system installed version, but it can't be a
> requirement.
>
> Also I agree, you should really decide if you want to focus on KDevelop4 or
> just play games with branches.
>
>
> Greetings,
>
> Dirk

So, to me, this brings up an interesting thought. Do we stick with KDE's 
subversion repository, and just tell the release-team "don't release us" or 
possibly move to our own infrastructure so that we get the freedom to do 
whatever we want ? 

This is just an idea, don't flame me for it. :)
--
Matt