GSOC 2012

[Michael George Hart]

Good point...
You can't imagine how myself and a few other developers were pissed off and annoyed when the latest Kdevelop 3.5x had a number of strange problems with in our distro, starting with our upgrade to openSuse 11.2 from 10.3 

None of us understood who was at fault all we that the distro and you guys were interested in giving an official solution that would be part of a patch version ... we eventually found a fix having to do with mismatched ltmain.sh and some other files.

Again I am not pointing fingers here. 

Right now you have a very respectable kdevelop 4.x THAT WORKs and all the distro are shipping. If you are going start doing stuff, that break kdevelop I say branch it of, and later consider merge it back into the main branch, while keep supporting the current version

It is hard enough selling kdevelop to ones own management when the thing (3.5x in this case) breaks  for no apparent reason by just upgrading the distro.

There maybe merit in making these time consuming upgrades to kdevelop 4.x that will not address any immediate needs. But, if you do so, make sure you, branch off to be eventually merged back into kdevelop while maintaining the existing system.

I have now becomes very happy in doing things the kdevelop 4.x way of doing thing verses kdevelop 3.5x but I think you still have a long way to go in having 4.x matching the broad scope of 3.5x series. So please focus on getting the foundation working perfectly. It really does help when my managers come and like and somewhat envious my development environment and can say it is working as expected. 

I, the unwilling, was lead by the unqualified, to do the unbelievable for so long with so little, that I attempted the impossible with nothing

Sent from my iPad

On Feb 17, 2012, at 4:38 AM, Sven Brauch <svenbrauch at googlemail.com> wrote:

> The question is not about when, but who. I couldn't do it for sure.
> Also, it's a huge amout of work without an actual immediate benefit.
> It's the kind of thing KDE applications tend to do way too much. If
> you have something that works 99%, fix the other 1%, and don't switch
> to something totally different, introducing tons of new bugs and
> taking years to get to a similar state like before. KDevelop is just
> getting to a point where it's stable enough to be called "stable" if a
> few more things are fixed. I *really* would be against another "let's
> break it all" step now.
> But it's your decision, of course :)
> 
> Also, about C/C++: everybody does whatever he/she wants here with file
> endings. I personally think it will introduce more problems than it
> solves. The only real benefit I can see is that you'd be able to
> report the use of C++ features in C code, but that doesn't really
> happen that often, does it?
> 
> Greetings
> 
> Am 17. Februar 2012 09:48 schrieb Alexandre Courbot <gnurou at gmail.com>:
>>> In case someone doesn't know this yet, Qt Creator is switching to Clang:
>>> http://labs.qt.nokia.com/2011/10/19/qt-creator-and-clang/
>> 
>> Plenty of good points in this page. Using CLang/LLVM also brings the
>> possibility to leverage on all the source code analysis/refactoring
>> tools that are built on top of them. The question of using CLang is
>> not about if, but rather about when.
>> 
>> Alex.
>> 
>> --
>> KDevelop-devel mailing list
>> KDevelop-devel at kdevelop.org
>> https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinfo/kdevelop-devel
> 
> -- 
> KDevelop-devel mailing list
> KDevelop-devel at kdevelop.org
> https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinfo/kdevelop-devel