>  I have traditionally installed tde in /opt, but if tqt3 is safe 
>to install
>along side of qt4, then should we install everything in /usr now 
>instead of /opt?
>
>  Pros? Cons?  I think for Arch, the powers-that-be would probably 
>prefer and
>/opt install until it can be verified that an install in /usr will 
>not conflict.
>
>  Are all the tqt3/qt4 and tde/kde4 conflicts eliminated?

Nope. Not at all. Just the ones we thought would cause direct 
conflict during run-time.

Although there was a lot of infrastructure and class renaming, many 
app names remain the same. If you install both desktops to /usr 
then one installation will overwrite the other with respect to the 
apps of the same name.

Run-time conflicts are also avoided by the way we wrote starttde to 
ensure $PATH is always correct for a Trinity environment.

Unless you are in total control of the target systems, or releasing 
your own distro where KDE4 never will be an option, just keep 
installing to /opt/trinity. I have been doing so now for two years 
and never have problems running from /opt/trinity. I keep KDE4 
installed. Partly to test, partly to test potential conflicts 
between the two desktops.

The only package I install to /usr is tqtinterface. I install all 
other packages to /opt/trinity. In my build scripts I install 
nominal docs, such as the traditional AUTHORS, COPYING, INSTALL, 
NEWS, TODO, jibberish documents to /usr/doc but that is all.

As you have been a way for a while, we also decided as a team to 
name our packages using 'trinity' as part of the package name. The 
placement is not as important as including the name. I name all of 
my packages as trinity-${module}-i486-blah-blah.txz. Works for me 
nicely because those jibberish documents are easy to find in my 
/usr/doc because every single directory is named trinity-${module}. 
Also in my /var/log/packages history directory, I can type ls 
trinity-* and quickly find all of my Trinity packages.

Darrell