RFC: Splitting Qt4 packages and implications of this

[Thiago Macieira]

Jarosław Staniek wrote:
>We know the benefits of having splitted Qt4 into gui and nongui libs.
>Now, the question is: what's up at the packaging level?

Nothing. Mandriva is doing it correctly already:

smart> query --provides=libkdecore.so.4
libkdecore4-30000000:3.5.5-2mdv2007.1 at i586

smart> query --provides=libkdeui.so.4
libkdecore4-30000000:3.5.5-2mdv2007.1 at i586

smart> query --provides=libQtCore.so.4
libqtcore4-2:4.2.1-1mdv2007.1 at i586


>We're not able to install a system without X11 dependency and be able to
>develop client or server solutions using Qt. This adds a penalty for Qt
> users from the very beginning compared to Java and .NET, doesn't it?

Complain to your distro.

>The question put to the extreme: what about moving kdecore to a separate
> package?

Already done.

>Of course I am not talking about dealing with packages creation - the
> general question is rather: should we and TT have a clear message
> (read: README.PACKAGERS file) stating that it's recommended to split
> Qt4 (and/or kdelibs) into separate packages, to get better modularity.

Distributors are free to package as they want to. KDE Libs is especially 
large, so having a single package might be interesting in terms of 
repository complexity.

-- 
  Thiago Macieira  -  thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
    PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
    E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20061201/67c25ecc/attachment.sig>