Am Montag, 18. Februar 2013, 10:17:35 schrieb Jaroslaw Staniek: > Hi Friedrich, thanks for the effort and explanation. > > Regarding the naming only: I think TINY is useful in general. It would > be a starting point to alternative GUIs and apps that are not in the > Active family but are have in certain aspects minimal or stipped-down > functionality. So I'd like to effectively see general name (such as > TINY) kept as it is.
What are you thinking exactly of? And we still could add that once those alternative GUIs and apps pop up, no? This sounds like preparing for hypothetical use cases, without concrete examples (and thus defined needs). But there are schools which teach to better avoid that, as it only adds unneeded complexity and will usually not be fitting stuff that actually pops up. And life showed at least me those schools are based on heuristics ;) Cheers Friedrich _______________________________________________ calligra-devel mailing list calligra-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
