>>> Should the kstyle directories and files be changed to tdestyle?
>>>
>>Probably.  How much would that break at this point though 
>>configuration wise?
>
>I don't know. I'm not complaining. :-) I only noticed the 
>differences when I was responding to bug report 1609. Seems we 
>have 
>moved far with so much renaming and of late we have continued some 
>
>mopping up of those efforts. :-)
>
>A quick scan of modules that install files to 
>$PREFIX/share/apps/kstyle:
>
>tdelibs
>tdebase
>tdeartwork
>tdesdk
>
>I don't have all packages installed right now so there might be a 
>few more.
>
>Other loose ends include renaming $TDEHOME/share/apps/kstyle-
>>tdestyle, where ever that is defined (tdelibs?), and r14-xdg-
>update. Probably other loose ends too.
>
>I notice when grepping the sources some internal functions of 
>kstyle* still exist. tdebase/kpersonalizer has cpp files with 
>kstyle8.
>
>I could hammer out and test the patches. The grunt work of the 
>patches should go fine, but I'd need a some days of validating 
>build runs and usability testing. If I get overwhelmed I holler. 
>Probably first scream and cry, but eventually holler. :-)

Creating patches went surprisingly smooth. The final list is short:

tdelibs
tdebase
tdeartwork
tdesdk
tde-style-lipstik
tde-style-qtcurve
koffice
tde-i18n

I had no build errors. A superficial test of selecting the styles 
in kcontrol resulted in no errors or problems.

Caveat: The tde-i18n patch is huge. So huge that I will not even 
try to post the patch or try to push to git until I reduce to 
smaller patches and push piece-meal one at a time.

That said, how do we want to proceed next? I can post the patches 
online and somebody else could test. Or I could just push to git 
and listen for screams of pain and anguish. No problems noticed 
here, but I'm only one person with my own perspective.

Darrell