trinity-devel@lists.pearsoncomputing.net

Message: previous - next
Month: June 2015

Re: [trinity-devel] Changes to tdevelop for R14.1.x and R14.0.1

From: Slávek Banko <slavek.banko@...>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:10:55 +0200
On Thursday 18 of June 2015 01:09:32 Michele Calgaro wrote:
> On 06/18/2015 02:03 AM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
> >> I personally disagree with this move, because your initial idea was to
> >> make R14 tde compatible and the rest was left for the KDE 3.15. Why
> >> moving back now?! What is the benefit of this?I really dislike changing
> >> things back and forth and on top after TDE stated that R14 will be TDE
> >> oriented.Could such things be discussed in the public please.
> >>
> >> regards
> >
> > Some of this might be due to the fact that I've been largely unavailable
> > for the past several months (life / putting food on the table), therefore
> > I think my original goals of migrating everything from KDE to TDE have
> > stalled.
> >
> > Michele, what is the actual benefit of maintaining compatibility with the
> > obsolete KDE 3.5 series instead of automatically upgrading the kdevelop
> > files to a TDE format?  There is no guarantee that KDE will continue to
> > use a compatible format in the future so I don't see how this is a good
> > idea?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Tim
>
> Hi there,
> the details of the discussion prior the changes were made can be found here
> (http://bugs.pearsoncomputing.net/show_bug.cgi?id=2308#c2).
> The change was made to assure we could still autogenerate cmake-based
> projects. Without doing so, it would render any "cmake based" project
> template unusable due to the fact that there is no TDevelop3 cmake
> generator available (and I doubt the cmake guys would create one just for
> us).
>
> Basically TDE is still going the TDE way, but had to concede on this point
> to preserve some useful functionality. Everything can be reverted if the
> majority of the users prefer so, but be aware that in this case this would
> come at a small loss of that extra functioanlity.
>
> Cheers
>   Michele
>

Preserving data compatibility seems to me useful.

For example, some time ago due to the renaming KWallet => TDEWallet was caused 
incompatibility of data files with stored passwords. Therefore are reverted 
portion of renaming data file header so that the data files could still be 
compatible with KWallet. It seems like a good reason to have a compatible 
files until will be necessary to change the stored data, which compels to 
change format of data files.

-- 
Slávek

Attachments: