<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 18 January 2016 at 20:27, Boudewijn Rempt <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:boud@valdyas.org" target="_blank">boud@valdyas.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span>On Mon, 18 Jan 2016, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Reason that I ask is that due to the split of Calligra into several repos (see background^) the layout in the repo structure does no longer properly reflect the project organisation. Right now there are three active repos in the calligra/ repo substructure:<br>
"calligra" at "calligra/"<br>
"krita" at "calligra/krita"<br>
"kexi" at "calligra/kexi"<br></blockquote></span></blockquote><div><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small">Thanks Friedrich, as always you introduce great amount of structure and logic to KDE projects :)<br></div><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">It's even a bit more interesting that that; there are sub-sub-projects<br>playground/libs/kdb<br>playground/libs/kproperty<br>playground/libs/kreport</div> <br><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small">- all historically and by heart being part of Calligra. In the future Calligra _initiative_ can contain repos from any "category", why not? Everyone can. See below for simple solutions to have that.<br></div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
</blockquote>
<br></span>
What I'm wondering is, where is this "structure" actually visible? Not in<br>
<div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline"></div><br>
<a href="https://quickgit.kde.org/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://quickgit.kde.org/</a><br>
<br>
or<br>
<br>
<a href="https://phabricator.kde.org/diffusion/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://phabricator.kde.org/diffusion/</a><br>
<br>
I see it reflected in the old, to be discarded<br>
<br>
<a href="https://projects.kde.org/projects" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://projects.kde.org/projects</a><br>
<br>
But where else? And what is it actually needed for?<span><br></span></blockquote><div><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline"><a href="http://build.kde.org" target="_blank">build.kde.org</a>'s config (I remember that only because </div> <div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">today I edited it: <a href="https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126797" target="_blank">https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126797</a> )<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">Is this visible on the web page? No idea.<br>e.g. <a href="https://build.kde.org/view/Calligra/" target="_blank">https://build.kde.org/view/Calligra/</a> groups some Calligra builds with direct deps, that's all.<br><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">I know <a href="http://chiliproject.org" target="_blank">chiliproject.org</a> that's used for <a href="http://projects.kde.org" target="_blank">projects.kde.org</a> would better be not patched. I hope this can be solved somehow and we can model our KDE structures by our tools, not the other way round.<br></div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<br>
(("calligra" at "calligra/" confuses at least kdesrc-build, sent an email to mpyne about if moving it to "calligra/calligra" should fix it.))<br>
<br>
Things that are not properly matching organization:<br>
* Krita starting with 3.* no longer is part of Calligra project<br>
(screws e.g. <a href="http://api.kde.org/bundled-apps-api/calligra-apidocs/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">api.kde.org/bundled-apps-api/calligra-apidocs/</a> and also<br>
what people think to which project Krita belongs)<br>
* Calligra & Krita are nowhere different to KDevelop, Digikam & Co,<br>
so no reason to be in a complete own toplevel structure,<br>
rather should be in the same sub structure, i.e. "Extragear",<br>
like extragear/calligra/* and extragear/graphics/krita<br>
<br>
More, not only Calligra & Krita related:<br>
* "Extragear" is an awful grouping name for apps with individual<br>
release plans, a legacy term that no longer fits most of the apps<br>
in that substructure<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
It's ghastly -- almost insulting. It's perpetuating the fallacy that<br>
there are core KDE projects and peripheral projects.<span><br></span></blockquote><div><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small">Trees are dead. </div><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">I'd suggest a flat structure:<br>- relations between apps is a graph not a tree anymore (Kexi can be both in office /productivity category as well as software development like KDevelop)<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">- it's 2016, people search, not browse<br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline"><br>Or if categorization is needed, on top of the flat structure, tags are the real means for that that people understand<br><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">There are app description formats: .lsm, .appdata.xml... I use them for Kexi. Some others too. .lsm supports keywords.<br><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">I think semantic tags would be best (or do we use them already?). <br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small;display:inline">A repo can be in a subproject and also belong to a number of categories.<br></div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
* "KDE Applications" is a misleading grouping name for apps with a<br>
central release plan, as if those with individual release plans<br>
are not "KDE" applications (as in, not done in the KDE community)<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
Horrible as well.<span><br></span></blockquote><div><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small">Yes, it's a surprise even to KDE people. Here, Calligra and KDevelop, to name just them, are not KDE Apps to normal people.<br></div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
* a single category per app as needed by the current tree structure layout<br>
of the repos, like "office", "graphics", "utils", is rather awkward,<br>
many apps do not match exactly one or would match multiple categories<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
Honestly, the need to group repositories is, to me, so weird that I think it would be best to adopt the following scheme:<br>
<br>
a/amarok<br>
a/...<br>
...<br>
c/calligra<br>
g/gcompris<br>
k/krita<br>
<br>
And so on. It's meaningless as it is; it would be better to make that clear,<br>
if grouping is really needed.<span><br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
So IMHO some update of the repository organisation would be good, to reflect how things are these days.<br>
Renaming of "Extragear" and "KDE Applications" is surely something which needs care from promo/marketing/VDG people first to find if that makes sense at all and what a good solution would be.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
That again begs the question: where is the "organization" which apparently has<br>
purely technical reasons visible to contributors and users?<br>
<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span>
(Being both maintainer of Okteta, which is in "KDE Applications", and meta-co-<br>
maintainer of Calligra, which is not, but still done in the very same KDE community, that current naming seems so wrong to me).<br>
<br>
But the actual names and grouping aside, for the pure technical renewing (which also involves all infrastructure like translation system, documentation, phabricator, etc), who is currently planning or working on what?<br>
So does it makes sense to wait some more, or should we assume the current organization stays for longer, and Calligra & Krita repos should be moved inside that organization for now?<br>
<br>
<br>
^Some background about Calligra repo split, as things are slightly complicated:<br>
<br>
KRITA) The "krita" repo was split off, because Krita has finally become a full project of its own, separate from Calligra. A logical place for the krita repo in the KDE repo structure would perhaps have been somewhere in extragear, but at least due to the translators preferring to keep the string catalogs of Krita in the "calligra" module as before, for less work, the krita repo was for now put as submodule of "calligra/".<br>
<br>
KEXI) Kexi continues to be part of the Calligra project/subcommunity, but the Kexi developers preferred a small simple repo "kexi" of their own (for build time and size). So the placement at "calligra/kexi" makes perfect sense.<br>
<br>
OTHERAPPS) As the other Calligra apps (Braindump, Karbon, Sheets, Words, Stage, etc.) are more tightly coupled and the binary interfaces between libs, plugins & apps can still change every other week, for now no further repo splitting is planned (to ensure atomic commits on API changes), and they all stay in the existing "calligra" repo.<br></span></blockquote></blockquote><div><br><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:monospace,monospace;font-size:small">To add a perspective, more smaller repos may or may now pop up out of the OTHERAPPS (calligra.git for now) in order to be properly shared. This comes with maintenance costs (nobody dreams of a single-C++-class repo). So after the repo split there are cases of copied code. Look at this as temporary state - having buildable projects is more important than having no files duplicated from the day zero.<br></div> </div><br></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div>regards, Jaroslaw Staniek<br><br>KDE:<br>: A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators<br>: and facilitators committed to Free Software development - <a href="http://kde.org" target="_blank">http://kde.org</a><br>Calligra Suite:<br>: A graphic art and office suite - <a href="http://calligra.org" target="_blank">http://calligra.org</a><br>Kexi:<br>: A visual database apps builder - <a href="http://calligra.org/kexi" target="_blank">http://calligra.org/kexi</a><br>Qt Certified Specialist:<br>: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek</a></div>
</div></div>