2011/4/8 Lukast dev
> > While in theory it can be Calligra 1.0 but I am definitely not for
> > Kexi 1.0 and Krita 1.0.
>
> +1 from me..
>
+1
> No Krita 1.0, please :)
> ___
> calligra-devel mailing list
> calligra-devel@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/m
> While in theory it can be Calligra 1.0 but I am definitely not for
> Kexi 1.0 and Krita 1.0.
+1 from me..
No Krita 1.0, please :)
___
calligra-devel mailing list
calligra-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
On 7 April 2011 20:50, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have discussed the possible version number for the first real release of
> Calligra a bit, wavering between 2.4 (because the gui is not yet done) or 3.0
> (because of the new text engine). But I recently thought:
>
> "Why not 1.0?"
>
> T
On Thursday 07 April 2011 20:50:50 Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> We have discussed the possible version number for the first real release of
> Calligra a bit, wavering between 2.4 (because the gui is not yet done) or
> 3.0 (because of the new text engine). But I recently thought:
>
> "Why not
Hi,
We have discussed the possible version number for the first real release of
Calligra a bit, wavering between 2.4 (because the gui is not yet done) or 3.0
(because of the new text engine). But I recently thought:
"Why not 1.0?"
There are many excellent reasons for using 1.0:
* it's the fir
