A humble packager's request: Retire kdeaddons.

Scott Wheeler wheeler at kde.org
Wed Feb 11 15:15:02 GMT 2004


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 11 February 2004 15:59, Dirk Mueller wrote:

> sorry, thats not what we're talking about. packages do want JuK and amaroK, 
> but they don't want to have the dependency mess. Here you have to build one 
> module twice to get everything right. that can't be it, and most packagers
> build systems don't support that.  

Right, but packagers don't have to care where the CVS is -- packagers will 
deal with the released TagLib tarball or the released amaroK tarball 
respectively.  There isn't a kdeextragear-3.2.tar.gz that they're having to 
rebuild multiple times.  They'll build TagLib before kdemultimedia and 
amaroK.

The loop that you mention only affects people building CVS -- i.e. not 
(generally speaking) packagers or end users.  I readily admit that it's an 
annoyance, but not one that affects packagers.

> > Also kdeextragear is a special case since it's not released as a module --
> > it's just a place that things happen to have their CVS located.
> 
> Thats wrong again. kdeextragear has rather strict policy rules which were 
> violated by this import. 

Quoting from http://extragear.kde.org/home/about.php --

"All applications in the Extra Gear will be released independently from each 
other, there will never be such thing as a Extra Gear package. There is a 
certain release process for applications in the Extra Gear."

That's what I was referring to.  I'm not sure which strict rules you're 
referring to and again, I agree that it's not a great fit, but better than 
the other options...

> kdesupport is something different - it was for copies of 3rd party libs that 
> are not maintained in our CVS. 

Yeah, I know -- but somehow "closer" to a good fit...
 
> TagLib however is a 3rd party lib that *is* maintained in our CVS. I agree 
> it might make sense to reopen kdesupport with that new policy. unserbreak 
> also belongs into kdesupport. 

Sounds good to me.  Any objections to such?

- -Scott

- -- 
Three words: you have no clue
- -Slashdot
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFAKkb/Qu0ByfY5QTkRAhJPAKCezv0iV8eNVnRuj16M7OEEquNHMACfbfgK
8xyFnmmJ1CfxPNscxr79ORg=
=YEQz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list