On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:27 PM, John Tapsell <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2009/3/20 Aleix Pol <[email protected]>: > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Allen Winter <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Howdy, > >> > >> I assume we are all following the "Qt MathML Widget" discussion on > k-c-d. > >> Ideas on that issue? > >> > >> My first thought was sourceforge with some folks to maintain it there. > >> > >> kdesupport is basically the same as sourceforge, but somewhat easier > >> to deal with. > >> > >> Would kdelibs be ok? doesn't feel "right" to go there, but I won't > object > >> if someone claims maintainership there. > >> > >> ?? > >> > >> -- > >> Allen Winter | Software Engineer | 1-888-872-9339 > >> KDAB, Inc. | "Platform-independent software solutions" > >> http://kdab.com | 1-866-777-5322 (US) | +46-563-540090 (Sweden) > > > > Referring to what thiago macieira said on the k-c-d list, I think that he > > has his point. > > We should only put it in kdelibs if we're forking it (what are your plans > > john?) and renaming it. > > I think we almost certainly want to do this, and encourage people to > expand on it. > > > > > > Otherwise I'd be fine if it is in a separate library in kdesupport, but > > since they don't ensure ABI stability i'm not sure whether that would be > a > > good idea. > > > > Thanks, > > Aleix > > > > PS: I'm not on this list, CC me if tehre is any other message on this > > subject please. > > > Wouldn't it be a better idea to keep the work on KFormula? we don't want 2 KDE codes doing the same thing!
_______________________________________________ release-team mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team
