> On Friday 24 June 2011 05:02:59 Timothy Pearson wrote:
>
>> Just to clarify, if you see a potential problem with the project please
>> feel free to bring it up on this list.  What has really struck a raw
>> nerve
>> here is the promotion of the apparently dead-end KDE:KDE3 as a real
>> world
>> alternative to the Trinity desktop project,
>
> From a user's point of view currently it is an alternative. But you are
> incorrect:
> I never made any promoting, marketing etc here. KDE3 in openSUSE just
> works
> and if somebody will package Trinity in OBS it will be excellent.

Then please be careful with your word choice.  What you have written here
in the past has, from a native English speaker's point of view, sounded
very antagonistic and competitive.

>
>> combined with the
>> rejection/criticism of our ideas with absolutely no alternatives
>> presented
>> or suggestions made.
>
> Well an alternative to dropping KOffice is porting ODF support
> from KDE4's KOffice. Do you like this idea? You said you have much of
> resources even to reimplement
> KDE3 support in Libre Office if it completely changes its interface, so
> adding ODF would be just as
> to swat a moquito, won't it?

Here is another example of what I mentioned above.  Whether you realize it
or not, the way this statement is phrased it is rather insulting.  How an
average English-speaking individual might read this would be as follows:

"Since you claim to have so many resources (which I really don't think you
do) then do what I suggested a long time ago, since I think it is terribly
easy and cannot understand why it is so very hard for you to do."

Is that really what you meant?  If not then please say so!  I had not
considered that there may be a language issue here.

To answer your question, yes, I think that is a good idea.  Would you like
to try your hand at it?  I probably will not get around to doing so until
the entire TQt4 port is complete and some of the open bugs have been
addressed.

The project is currently somewhat swamped; once the TQt4 port is complete
and CMake support has been added, we have enough developer resources to
keep things moving along quickly.  However, we are still in the middle of
those two operations and so are not able to absorb as many of the
miscellaneous tasks (such as gcc 4.6 compilation repairs, .odf support,
etc.) as you or I would like.  Any help is much appreciated during this
transitional period.

Tim