moving automoc to kdesupport

[Alexander Neundorf]

Hi David,

On Saturday 15 March 2008, David Faure wrote:
> On Saturday 15 March 2008, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I and Matthias would like to move automoc from kdelibs/cmake/ to
> > kdesupport. This will make it easier to use it also for Qt-only
> > applications and distros may package it separately.
>
> Good idea -- although, given that it's for use with cmake, why not make it
> part of cmake? 

Yes, I also already had this idea.
But let's do this step-by-step, first one being moving it out of kdelibs.

Kitware wants only BSD-licensed software in their "products". 
Matthias and I agreed that we could relicense it to BSD.
But I am not sure about how that fits with GPL-only Qt. Does the GPL Qt make 
automoc automatically GPL even if the files say it's BSD ?
And how does the Qt GPL exception mix into that ?

Beside that, we should ask the cmake maintainers first whether they would 
actually accept it. The chances may be quite good. They would be _much_ 
better if automoc would use only the STL (that would also make building Qt 
with cmake easier).

> Otherwise Qt-only apps will have to say "requires cmake and
> automoc", both coming from a different place....
> (and the name "automoc" is already taken by the old kde1 tool, technically)
> This one is really a cmake-automoc or something like that.

I think it should be possible to use it also from other build tools, but I 
guess Scons does the work in python, qmake has the feature, what about 
autotools and Qt4 ?

> > Is there any compatibility issues with this ?
> > I think it should be ok, automoc will still be there if kdelibs is
> > installed.
>
> You mean kdesupport will install it as "automoc" and kdelibs will install
> it as "kde4automoc" so that they don't create a conflict?
>
> Or you mean "kdelibs will require automoc which kdesupport will provide"?

This one.

> In fact both are fine with me, I'm just wondering what you meant :)

:-)

Alex