From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QKkyt-0007IF-QR for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 13 May 2011 05:32:08 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2B90D1C00F; Fri, 13 May 2011 05:30:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.alltele.net (m1.alltele.net [85.30.0.4]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DD281C00F for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 05:30:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] ([87.227.57.71]) by smtp.alltele.net (IceWarp 10.3.1 RC1) with ESMTP id WKR35020 for ; Fri, 13 May 2011 07:30:20 +0200 Message-ID: <4DCCC1EC.2080708@coolmail.se> Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 07:30:20 +0200 From: pk User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110510 Lightning/1.0b3pre Thunderbird/3.1.10 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone? References: <20110512152137.29e28325@digimed.co.uk> <4DCBF0D7.1080501@gmail.com> <201105122317.10448.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <4DCC54B5.6070905@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4DCC54B5.6070905@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.27 required=7.00 tests=LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT=1.56,RATWARE_RCVD_BONUS_SPC=1.00,MR_NOT_ATTRIBUTED_IP=0.20,SMILEY=-0.50,NO_RDNS2=0.01,MR_DIFF_MID=1.00 version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (1.1) on smtp.alltele.net X-CTCH: RefID="str=0001.0A0B0208.4DCCC1ED.002E,ss=1,re=0.000,fgs=0"; Spam="Unknown"; VOD="Unknown" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 15a8f13cd1ca71faee2b39d5d3f94730 On 2011-05-12 23:44, Dale wrote: > Your questions don't disprove what me and others have posted. As I have I think Alans point is that while the KDE developers (volunteers, or paid for) have certain goals which may or may not be tangential to yours (clearly, in the case of KDE3 vs KDE4 they are not). So unless you pay someone to have your specific requirements satisfied you don't get to complain. The volunteers have an "itch to scratch", i.e. they want some certain functionality which they care about and are, probably, not interested in anything else. Paid for developers are (probably/most likely) being told what to work on. And developer resources are, probably, scarce so... If you (and others) wish KDE3 to be supported then you either need to: 1. Support/maintain KDE3 yourselves. 2. Pay someone to support/maintain KDE3. That's the way it works, which is also somewhat valid for commercial software, but you usually don't get the option of paying the producer to maintain your specific version unless you are a _big_ customer (with lots of money), but with open source you at least have the option of "scratching an itch" yourself or paying someone to do the work for you (and even pool resources with people who share the same interests). > mistake. I point it out so that hopefully it won't be made again. Of course, anyone can have an opinion! :-D Best regards Peter K