> Timothy Pearson wrote:
>> However, twin will NEVER be completely deleted.  Why?  I don't like
>> relying on an upstream project (KDE) that has a history of seriously
>> breaking things in new releases (history is history and cannot be
>> changed).  We need something to fall back on if kwin turns out to have
>> serious problems (e.g. on certain graphics hardware), even if twin's
>> codebase is never touched again.
>
> This doesn't really make sense to me. KDE 4 development never broke the
> existing KDE 3.5 in any way. (It's also silly to say that the KDE
> developers prevented people from enjoying KDE 3.5 after KDE 4 was
> released.) If there would be a stable version of kwin4 working well with
> Trinity in the future, it will always be possible to stick with that
> version if newer versions would turn out to be problematic.
>
> I see no problems in using an upstream project here at all.

I guess if we kept a known working copy of kwin and only imported from
upstream after stability testing then it would be viable to delete twin.

I am not the be all and end all of TDE knowledge.  If I am not making
sense please correct me! :-)

Tim