RFC: Turning flag TINY into ACTIVEONLY, move Author to toplevel dir

[Friedrich W. H. Kossebau]

Am Montag, 18. Februar 2013, 10:48:42 schrieb Boudewijn Rempt:
> On Sunday 17 February 2013 Feb, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> > Currently CalligraActive is only built in TINY build set.
> 
> That sounds wrong to me. I think we need
> 
> a) Full build: build everything that can be built
> b) Active build: build only the things needed for Active
> c) Creative build: build only krita and karbon.

What about the current default,
d) Desktop build: build everything but Active stuff

Because Calligra Active targets especially the PlasmaActive environment, and 
thus is not really useful in normal enviroments, so I would expect some people 
to want an ActiveOnlyInverted or LegacDesktopOnly :)
But then the same question needs to be applied, who would need that? Until 
someone says "me", we could just ignore it.

> > TINY also limits the
> > filters which are installed. What is the purpose of TINY? Who is known to
> > use TINY? Could it perhaps be removed, or rather changed to ACTIVEONLY?
> As inge explained, tiny is a historical artefact, it dates back to the
> FreOffice/Calligra mobile days.
> > One thing that also seems strange to me is that the executables are also
> > done in the parts/ subdirs for most programs. What about splitting that
> > out into a sibling app/ subdir? Would help with structure
> 
> I wouldn't mind that. It's currently not consisten in any case across all
> applications. For instance, krita doesn't have a part directory, and the
> part and the exe are in the toplevel krita directory.

> Mind -- I think we
> need to get rid of KParts and KoParts completely, but that's something I'm
> investigating and want to discuss at the sprint.

Right, I only wanted to help slightly with the current things.

> > And I would also ask to move Author out of its ambush and give it a full
> > real toplevel dir, to reduce the complexity in dir layout. Or is there
> > any real need to have it there? Now it even has an icon ;), no need to be
> > shy and hide. And time for an own SHOULD_BUILD_AUTHOR.
> 
> I'd wait with that until we can do a real refactoring... The way author and
> words are mixed up is really ugly, but I don't see how it can be easily
> fixed.

I will have a look, but given the replies I might not move Author stuff around 
then and instead just increase complexity of the build instructions as needed 
in words/ ;)

>From the current feedback I will cook up a review request, so we have 
something to push into shape, but still await more comments in the meantime.

Cheers
Friedrich