On 02/27/2012 09:59 AM, Calvin Morrison wrote: > Here is a solution. > > Don't offer symlinks. Force users to memorize very minor changes in a few > differnet programs. If their scripts don't work - it will be pretty obvious why. > In our release announcement we will not what has changed. > > One thing that bugs me about Trinity is the fear of any change whatsoever. Yes > we want to continue the KDE3 tradition, no we are not exactly kde3. If we make > changes, users will have to adjust. > > It is better to force them to learn the new names then down the road having more > nasty issues with symlinks and packaging and a whole mess of crap that isn't a > good idea. > > Calvin I'm not adverse to change -- I have fully embraced kde4.... Seriously, The issue isn't 'change' -- it's about 'smart change'. The symlink issue is a crutch - yes, but it is a necessary one until the entire codebase and applications can be updated to use the new names. CASE-IN-POINT - twin-style-crystal will not build because the ${TDEDIR}/lib/kde directory has been renamed ${TDEDIR}/lib/trinity. With the complex build wizardry now used in building (libtools/cmake/take your pick) it is not a simple 'grep some-changed-name some-source.c' to find the hardcoded link. The problem may not even be in the source, but instead, some crazy submodule somewhere... If symlinks will provide a way to alleviate build or runtime issues until the source and build system can be completely verified and fixed to use the renamed files/locations, then I think they server a valid temporary purpose. Just my .02 and not an argument against changing anything. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.