From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 9 14:07:29 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF9ACF9 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 14:07:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mi+thun@aldan.algebra.com) Received: from smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.157.102]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E8D9155 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 14:07:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mr16.lnh.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.157.36]) by smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2013 09:07:28 -0500 Received: from smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.157.104]) by mr16.lnh.mail.rcn.net (MOS 4.3.4-GA) with ESMTP id CEH18399; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 09:07:27 -0500 X-Auth-ID: anat Received: from pool-173-70-92-11.nwrknj.fios.verizon.net (HELO [192.168.1.8]) ([173.70.92.11]) by smtp04.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2013 09:07:27 -0500 Message-ID: <50ED799F.5060102@aldan.algebra.com> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 09:07:27 -0500 From: "Mikhail T." User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120820 Thunderbird/14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why delete KDE3 ports? References: <50EADA33.9010308@aldan.algebra.com> <50EB16B2.4070502@FreeBSD.org> <50EB1991.8010400@marino.st> <87txqro2jw.fsf@FreeBSD.org> <50EC8004.4020106@marino.st> <87mwwjnuws.fsf@FreeBSD.org> <1357689775652-5775952.post@n5.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1357689775652-5775952.post@n5.nabble.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2013 14:07:29 -0000 On 08.01.2013 19:02, Jakub Lach wrote: > I'm on the fence. It's true, that there is no low-print feature complete > equivalent for KDE3. Worse, KDE4 is not only much heavier (which could've been acceptable). It is also not compatible -- people like myself, who customized their desktops with additional menus, who created knotes, etc. will have to redo all of their settings. KDE4, as built, is not even going to look under the ~/.kde. Though it can be compiled to consider the old directory, the format/syntax for many of the config-files has changed -- and there is no "upgrade path". > On the other hand, if nobody wants to maintain Trinity, well > it should be letten go, as sooner or later there will be problems. Before becoming "maintained", Trinity first needs to be ported -- a substantial effort, because, for example, the project switched to its own verstion Qt (Trinity Qt). All classes have been renamed from Qfoo to TQfoo... This can all be handled, but meanwhile, until there ARE actual problems, leave the ports alone, please. -mi