[Kde-scm-interest] [Proposal] Package splitting with thin meta-repos

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Monday 08 February 2010, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> On Monday 08 of February 2010 12:42:02 Mike Arthur wrote:
> > On 6 Feb 2010, at 14:41, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > > How about moving all shared .cmake files to either separate package (or
> > > maybe with modules fetched from Internet, sth like knewstuff or PEAR or
> > > just SVN) - as current kdelibs cmake policies are too strict, besides
> > > rebuilding kdelibs just to get newer cmake files seems silly. That
> > > would benefit both cases imho.
> >
> > How are the current KDELibs CMake policies "too strict"? What problems
> > are these causing?
>
> http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/CMake_and_Source_Compatibility (general)
> http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/CMake_Commit_Policy (kdelibs/cmake)
>
> KDElibs CMake policies cause no problems - they solve them. It's just this
> strictness currently may seem to discourage developers from getting their
> .cmake files in shape and pushing them to kdelibs instead of bundling
> within modules (like kdenetwork etc).

If we would have another package just consisting of cmake files, I think the 
same rules would have to apply to it, and I think this may have the same 
effect on the developers.
Installing cmake files comes with a cost, so not sharing them if they are used 
only in some very rare cases also has advantages.

Maybe for each current kdefoo/ module there should also be a kdefoo-libs/ 
module, which would contain the libs from that module, so that the apps would 
have less in-module dependencies. And it could also contain the cmake files. 
But I still would recommend not to install those file.

Alex