KDE/kdepimlibs

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Thursday 14 May 2009, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 13.05.09 18:37:53, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
...
> Agree.
> > I think I agree with Christophe that installing kdepimlibs into its own
> > subdir would be a good thing.
>
> I do understand your point, but IMHO having now one or two modules in
> include/<modulename> but other modules (not only kdelibs, but also
> kdebase libs) in include/KDE just adds confusion. We should just put
> this down as todo for KDE5 to use include/<modulename> for _all_ modules
> including kdelibs and leave what we have now so its at least consistent
> - even though not perfect.
>
> > ...
> >
> > > So, are there other serious reasons, other than that kdepimlibs "looks
> > > special(?)" wrt the rest of KDE?
> >
> > It's how "the rest of KDE" is defined. As I said above, I think it makes
> > sense to see include/KDE/ as the include dir for the core of KDE, which
> > is kdelibs.
>
> I don't, for me include/KDE naturally translates to any core module of
> KDE (i.e. anything in trunk/KDE). Only include/KDELibs would translate
> to kdelibs to me.

This is really the question.
And I tend towards include/KDE/ is kdelibs.
So, but while we allow non-kdelibs but KDE/ headers to be installed there, I 
don't see a reason why we should really enforce it ?
(actually I think the analogy to include/Qt/ is not that bad)

Alex