On Wednesday 15 April 2009 20:09:11 Kevin Kofler wrote: > Juha Tuomala wrote: > > On Wednesday 15 April 2009 19:37:38 Kevin Kofler wrote: > >> Juha Tuomala wrote: > >> > Shipping the 0.36 was a mistake and a good example of its consequences > >> > was a party that started using that point-of-time API in their > >> > project and later found out that it was just a developer snapshot > >> > and didn't exist anymore. > >> > >> If you're talking about KitchenSync > > > > KitchenSync is a GUI, it doesn't provide an API. > > But it uses one, which happens to be the libopensync 0.3x one in the KDE 4 > releases and thus the brokenness which led KDE upstream to disable it in > KDE 4.2. And they chose that API based on (false) assurance from the > OpenSync developers that 0.40 would be ready in time for KDE 4.0, then 4.1, > it had nothing whatsoever to do with distros packaging it. You're referring to a problem that has been solved already. I gave an example of problem that could happen again. Fedora should not repeatedly lead some third party project into wasting manhours by distributing and hinting to use useless dead API. Tuju -- Varo hattupäisiä autoilijoita. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
