On Monday 17 March 2014 20:14:24 John Layt wrote: > On 17 March 2014 18:15, Kevin Ottens <er...@kde.org> wrote: > > I think that list makes sense. Is there anyone who couldn't sleep at night > > if those were in KDE Porting Aids? > > +1 to this strategy, although some bikeshedding on the "portingaids" > name might be welcome :-) Hmmm, nope, I'm drawing a blank... > > I like the limit on kde4support, we only have to look to Qt3Support to > know that if the aids are left in place people will avoid porting away > from them until they absolutely have to. I'm not sure we need to call > it a "product" though, perhaps just saying a special category of > Frameworks providing transitional support for a limited period of time > for apps migrating from kdelibs4 to KF5 would be enough. Hey, how > about KDE Transitional Frameworks? :-)
Better name indeed... I would be concerned about the proximity with KDE Frameworks name wise though. That being said, having a crappy name for the product containing the deprecated modules is not necessarily a bad thing, we want to avoid marketing it widely anyway (at least outside of KDE). :-) Regards. -- Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net KDAB - proud supporter of KDE, http://www.kdab.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
