3 ms·
My conclusion: Your typical KDE user is not in the position to do the non-trivial work of porting a large C++ code base. Nor does she know where to get started.
by tobiasu 14y ago
My conclusion: Your typical KDE user is not in the position to do the non-trivial work of porting a large C++ code base. Nor does she know where to get started. Such bloatware needs at least one dedicated and interested developer on each target OS.
We now have one, so there is quite some movement on this front in the recent months.
- mpyne 14y ago> Such bloatware needs at least one dedicated and interested developer on each target OS. That's correct. Although I'm one of the few who actually seems to care about portability as a good practice I don't have the time to run 5 different OS'es to verify each of my volunteered contributions works on every feasible POSIX platform. In the end someone who is interested in each of those platforms needs to help take on the task of ensuring that the software they use works on the platform they use (that is, if they wish for the software to work). This can be as simple as reporting bugs, helping with integration into platform-specific libraries (which KDE is usually very good about using through adapter libraries to ensure portability), reporting platform-specific bugs that need worked around, etc. Some projects are already taking a WONTFIX attitude to portability bugs. I will push where I can to make sure that KDE isn't one of them, but I can't change the number of hours in a day... non-Linux developers need to contribute too if they want a great KDE on that platform.