refactoring was Re:

Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
>> not at all random, but trying to get libqpe up to date and more 
>> compatible with Qtopia.
> [...]
>> When has HEAD _ever_ been known as the stable tree on any project?
> 
> Upgrading libqpe sounds good in theory, but it would have been better to
> have branched before that. Since we don't have a development branch in
> Opie, HEAD _is_ the stable tree in this project. Feel free to dig it up
> in the mailing list archives, if you forgot on what we agreed after
> merging development and stable branches.

ahh yes, i remember now.
An 'effectively dead' project needed new rules, and since there is a
lack of interest from developers, I take it upon myself to call a new order.

Here's how it works where I work (not cvs):

main - new features/new development, highly unstable
2 - current stable 2 tree, maintenance mode
2.1 - this is 2.1.x
4.1 - this is current 4.1.x
4.1.0
4.1.2
4.1.4 - this is 4.1.4, feature freeze/bug fix/

when a bug gets fixed in 4.1, it is integrated with main, possibly
needing manual integration

>>> Opie development may be effectively dead,
>> Then why does it matter to you and why bring this up, if you or everyone 
>> else is not interested in developing Opie?
> 
> Because it is still an important environment option for embedded linux
> distributions like OpenZaurus, Familiar Linux, and Angstrom.

well, I heard talk that opie might be dropped due to lack of
development/progress, so it can't be that important to them if
there is that kind of talk. There is the whole koen thing. All the
disdainful comments about Trolltech, Qt, Qtopia and even Opie that are
made. Not to mention the distribution dropping of (release) support for
5000d, 5500, 5600, and 6000... but those are another matter.

>> I am, and I am going to proceed with changes I see fit, otherwise I will 
>> simply start my own project, and make changes there as I see fit.
> 
> Ok, if you insist on doing these things on HEAD, then a stable branch is
> necessary. If your planned changes are huge, I recommend starting a
> completely new Opie repository. It would be a good chance to clean up
> the build system and infrastructure and remove the core/noncore split.

well, I do have a refactored tree locally, already.
See tree attachment

*Removed the 'core/noncore' split
*Reverted those blue icons.
*Removed unsupported apps
*Added proper 'make install'. I need to finish off the 'make install' by
adding apps and pics
*Updated qmake
*Added pngscale so we can scale icons at compile time, depending on
display size.


>> You don't have to agree with my changes, I certainly do not agree with 
>> all the changes everyone has made, but I did not cause a stink because 
>> whoever developer wanted them in.
> 
> I don't know how you manage your contributions to other open source
> projects, but until now this project has been based on consensus. Feel
> free to dig in the opie-dev archives, major changes have been discussed
> before they went in.
> 

Adding one widget - locationcombo, (for camera2 and a few other qtopia
apps out there) is not a major change, as is the other few symbol
changes I made, it is only a new feature. Besides, it came from Qtopia,
and is not an entirely new, untested, unwanted/needed widget.

Since most other developers (including you) have seemingly jumped ship
here (for anything other than little bug fixes - bluetooth work not
included), in my eyes, discussion was not needed. Besides, with whom
would I discuss this with? As there are no other Opie developers other
than Dmitriy. You yourself seem to have deemed Opie dead, and more
interested in EFL anyway.




-- 
Lorn 'ljp' Potter
Trolltech Qtopia Community Manager
Opie Core Developer
http://qtopia.net

_______________________________________________

http://opie.handhelds.org/cgi-bin/moin.cgi/DeveloperWikiIndex

Opie-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://handhelds.org/mailman/listinfo/opie-devel