Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
KDE and OpenSync develop KitchenSync to replace KPilot (NewsForge)
NewsForge covers
the KitchenSync. "Developers of the K Desktop Environment (KDE)
have teamed with those at the OpenSync project to produce a graphical
interface called KitchenSync to replace the KPilot PDA sync tool beginning
with the release of KDE 4. KDE developers made the decision to drop the
current synchronization code, including KPilot, an older application also
called KitchenSync, KSync, Kandy, and libksync, earlier this year in Spain
at the aKadamy conference, just days after a SUSE-sponsored coding session
in Nuremberg, Germany, where the KitchenSync interface was
developed."
(Log in to post comments)
KDE and OpenSync develop KitchenSync to replace KPilot (NewsForge) Posted Dec 17, 2005 17:18 UTC (Sat) by N0NB (guest, #3407) [Link] This is good. It shows that KDE and other F/OS Software projects need not adopt an attitude against anything "not invented here". The devs have stated that in areas where their older code has greater functionality, it will be contributed to OpenSync.
I think this is an excellent demonstration of the borrowing, sharing and ultimately choosing of best-of-breed implementations where F/OS Software leads the way.
KDE and OpenSync develop KitchenSync to replace KPilot (NewsForge) Posted Dec 18, 2005 0:09 UTC (Sun) by hitmark (guest, #34609) [Link] ok, i dont know if i should laugh or groan. but atleast kde can claim to be the desktop enviroment that includes everything, uncluding the kitchen-sink/sync :P
KDE and OpenSync develop KitchenSync to replace KPilot (NewsForge) Posted Dec 18, 2005 4:22 UTC (Sun) by tzafrir (subscriber, #11501) [Link] https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122411
KDE and OpenSync develop KitchenSync to replace KPilot (NewsForge) Posted Dec 18, 2005 15:51 UTC (Sun) by jonth (subscriber, #4008) [Link] Some people have way too much free time....
KDE and OpenSync develop KitchenSync to replace KPilot (NewsForge) Posted Dec 19, 2005 0:52 UTC (Mon) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link] I think you should RTFA, more specifically the second sentence :-)
|
|
||||||||||||