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.