Re: let's hope

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent
thread

Re: let's hope
by Mike on Friday 22/Feb/2008, @09:32

Why exactly are we reinventing Evolution here anyways? Wouldn't it be easier just to port Evolution to KDE 4/Qt? Evolution is so much better, works great with MS-Outlook environments and does everything I need it to.

Why develop a separate program? Why not just merge it with Evolution? I though KDE and gnome had an interoperability/shared resources agreement a few years ago? Wasn't that the idea behind it?

Related Links

·   Articles on KDE PIM
·   Also by Mike
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: let's hope
by Anon on Friday 22/Feb/2008, @09:55

"Why exactly are we reinventing Evolution here anyways?"

Who is "we"? I'm not even sure that Evolution predates KMail. Anyway, I don't think that building a modular and well-designed PIM suite integrated with KDE counts as "reinventing Evolution", anyway.

"Wouldn't it be easier just to port Evolution to KDE 4/Qt"

I'm sure the GNOME guys would love it if someone ported their official mail client to a completely different toolkit!

And no - "porting Evolution to KDE 4/Qt" is basically the same statement as "starting from scratch, write a KDE 4/ Qt mail client that is a clone of Evolution".

"Why not just merge it with Evolution?"

It would be great if you had the slightest grasp of software engineering before you started second-guessing the KDE developers.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: let's hope
by Kevin Kofler on Friday 22/Feb/2008, @10:25

Evolution has tons of bugs, it's probably the GNOME component which gets most complaints about bugginess on the Fedora mailing lists. And it would be infeasible to port it to KDE anyway, it's already hard enough for them to move it from the obsolete GNOME technologies it's using to the current GNOME ones.

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: let's hope
by Kevin Krammer on Friday 22/Feb/2008, @10:50

> Why exactly are we reinventing Evolution here anyways?

In case you are referring to EDS (Evolution Data Server): Akonadi is more a next generation implementation of the same principle, including a wider range of use cases (e.g. also handle e-mails).

> Wouldn't it be easier just to port Evolution to KDE 4/Qt?

Most likely not, but it would certainly be possible to port Evolution to Akonadi.
In December I started working on an EDS adapter for Akonadi based on the D-Bus enabled version of EDS, but then migration D-Bus got removed from the GNOME roadmap. Though I might have a look at a later time, i.e. once we have Akonadi released and our application stack upon it working properly.

> I though KDE and gnome had an interoperability/shared resources agreement a few years ago?

No formal agreement, since this wouldn't be possible (both projects are driven by their contributor communities and do not have some kind of official body which can do binding agreements regarding development).

There is some consensus that service oriented strategies allow us to share certain infrastructure easier than bringing foreign components into the others software stack, but infrastructure can not be replaced from one day to the next because there are all sorts of compatibilty and migration issues that need to be taken care of

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"Being part of KDE is quite a character building experience." -- Matthias Ettrich
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.