On Fri, 2011-01-28 at 12:38 -0700, Thomas S Hatch wrote: > On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Ray Rashif <schiv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 29 January 2011 01:20, David C. Rankin > > <drankinatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Guys, > > > > > > As I work through building the pkgbuilds for Trinity on Arch, I > > have > > > been keeping notes, etc. on what has to take place. I will put that > > > information up on a wiki. My question to the Arch devs is "do you want it > > > here on the Arch wiki, or do you want it over on the Trinity wiki?" > > > > > > It doesn't matter to me. It makes more sense to have it here, but > > > there has been so much rancor over 'kde3 is dead' that I don't want to go > > to > > > the effort here if somebody is just going to nix it. > > > > > > For the interested, Trinity is no longer kde3. It is currently > > > actively developed, and is moving to cmake and qt4. There are current > > builds > > > for Debian, Ubuntu and Slackware being maintained. My goal is to create a > > > set of pkgbuilds for Arch (which will obviously take a bit of time). But > > if > > > I can get them working from the svn tree, it should be a great resource > > for > > > Arch. > > > > > > So what say the powers that be? Do the wiki page here or at > > Trinity? > > > > The wiki is for Arch-related documentation, so why not? > > > > Yes! wiki it up! kde3 is only dead as long as noone maintains it. That's how Arch works, after all. So yes, I think putting Trinity on the wiki is fine, and it should/will only get nixed if it stops getting maintained.
