On Monday 15 October 2012 16:07:55 Calvin Morrison wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/11gf0d/the_problem_with_trinity_desk top_environment/
The Romanians have a proverb :)
"A dog dies from too much walking, a fool from worrying about other's business."
http://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/11gf0d/the_problem_with_trinity_deskt...
I suggest we add a disclaimer about our use of the word "fork." Yes, technically, Trinity is a fork in the sense that we had to make a distinct effort to break from the original KDE developers, KDE logos, trademarks, etc. The KDE folks wanted to wash their hands of KDE3 but retain rights to the name KDE. Anybody who wanted to maintain or improve the KDE3 code had to move out of the neighborhood.
Fork in name only. In practical terms, Trinity is a continuation of KDE 3.5.10. Trinity is a project that maintains the KDE3 code base and provides improvements.
In the end, as a community we need to stop back pedaling in self-defense every time Martin pees. Just ignore him. He is doing a great job of discrediting himself.
I think the ending of Voltaire's Candide applies best to these ongoing debates:
"That's very well said, and may all be true," said Candide; "but let's cultivate our garden."
Darrell
On 2012年10月16日 02:39, Darrell Anderson wrote:
In practical terms, Trinity is a continuation of KDE 3.5.10
I'm sorry, but I have to say you(Trinity) are not. KDE promises binary compatibility and you(Trinity) breaks it. Is that called continuation ?
Pretending and disclaiming you are a continuation of KDE3 would eventually only bring more bad names to you(Trinity) and probably KDE.
Face and acknowledge the truth: You are a fork, and everybody already knows.
Seriously, is that so hard and shameful?
Regards Jekyll
In practical terms, Trinity is a continuation of KDE 3.5.10
I'm sorry, but I have to say you(Trinity) are not. KDE promises binary compatibility and you(Trinity) breaks it. Is that called continuation ?
Pretending and disclaiming you are a continuation of KDE3 would eventually only bring more bad names to you(Trinity) and probably KDE.
Face and acknowledge the truth: You are a fork, and everybody already knows.
Seriously, is that so hard and shameful?
Fair enough. Do you feel better now?
Darrell
He clearly said "in practical terms". I think that much is clear.
I dont understand the big deal about binary compatiblity. Its a buzzword and has much less realistic benefit than purported.
Darrell stand behind your statement lad! On Oct 15, 2012 6:17 PM, "Jekyll Wu" adaptee@gmail.com wrote:
On 2012年10月16日 02:39, Darrell Anderson wrote:
In practical terms, Trinity is a continuation of KDE 3.5.10
I'm sorry, but I have to say you(Trinity) are not. KDE promises binary compatibility and you(Trinity) breaks it. Is that called continuation ?
Pretending and disclaiming you are a continuation of KDE3 would eventually only bring more bad names to you(Trinity) and probably KDE.
Face and acknowledge the truth: You are a fork, and everybody already knows.
Seriously, is that so hard and shameful?
Regards Jekyll
------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-devel-unsubscribe@** lists.pearsoncomputing.nettrinity-devel-unsubscribe@lists.pearsoncomputing.net For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-devel-help@lists.** pearsoncomputing.net trinity-devel-help@lists.pearsoncomputing.net Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-devel.** pearsoncomputing.net/ http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.** pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_**lists/#top-postinghttp://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
On Tuesday 16 of October 2012 00:17:11 Jekyll Wu wrote:
On 2012年10月16日 02:39, Darrell Anderson wrote:
In practical terms, Trinity is a continuation of KDE 3.5.10
I'm sorry, but I have to say you(Trinity) are not. KDE promises binary compatibility and you(Trinity) breaks it. Is that called continuation ?
Pretending and disclaiming you are a continuation of KDE3 would eventually only bring more bad names to you(Trinity) and probably KDE.
Face and acknowledge the truth: You are a fork, and everybody already knows.
Seriously, is that so hard and shameful?
Regards Jekyll
Are you sure it's broken binary compatibility? I use Twinkle compiled with KDE support. Binary is compiled against KDE 3.5.x libraries from Squeeze and QT3 from Squeeze. And same unchanged binary working without any problems with the TDE 3.5.x libraries and QT3 from Trinity.
Slavek --
In article 201210160530.31317.slavek.banko@axis.cz, Slávek Banko trinity-devel@lists.pearsoncomputing.net wrote:
On Tuesday 16 of October 2012 00:17:11 Jekyll Wu wrote:
On 2012年10月16日 02:39, Darrell Anderson wrote:
In practical terms, Trinity is a continuation of KDE 3.5.10
I'm sorry, but I have to say you(Trinity) are not. KDE promises binary compatibility and you(Trinity) breaks it. Is that called continuation ?
Pretending and disclaiming you are a continuation of KDE3 would eventually only bring more bad names to you(Trinity) and probably KDE.
Face and acknowledge the truth: You are a fork, and everybody already knows.
Seriously, is that so hard and shameful?
Regards Jekyll
Are you sure it's broken binary compatibility? I use Twinkle compiled with KDE support. Binary is compiled against KDE 3.5.x libraries from Squeeze and QT3 from Squeeze. And same unchanged binary working without any problems with the TDE 3.5.x libraries and QT3 from Trinity.
I suspect KDE long term binary compatibility has as much to do with the C++ ABI as the code's API. During the lifetime of KDE 3, Debian progressed from kdelibs4, to (I think) kdelibs4c, to kdelibs4c2, to kdelibs4c2a, all due to g++ ABI changes. That's leaving aside any Qt soname changes, which I don't remember so well and can't be fussed to dig out of the archives.
Nick
-
Calvin Morrison -
Darrell Anderson -
Jekyll Wu -
Nick Leverton -
Serghei Amelian -
Slávek Banko