Merging libconversation to kdelibs

Parker Coates parker.coates at
Sun Aug 30 16:36:25 BST 2009

On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 11:09, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> Em Domingo 30. Agosto 2009, às 15.04.21, Allen Winter escreveu:
>> On Sunday 30 August 2009 7:31:09 am you wrote:
>> > Am Sunday 30 August 2009 11:47:25 schrieb Carsten Niehaus:
>> > > I just wanted to ping about the move of libconversation into kdelibs.
>> >
>> > Hm, that name is a bit generic. Maybe libkdeunitconversion or
>> > abbreviations of that, e.g. libkunitconv?
>> >
>> > If other coversion types are planned than unit conversions, then I would
>> > just add some "kde" or "k" in there.
>> >
>> > At least opensync uses a already:
>> >
>> Yes, I would like to see this library committed.
>> Perhaps the name is a problem, though.
>> I don't have a better suggestion than libkunits or libkunitconv
> We don't have to name all our libraries with k.
> libunitconv is fine.

We don't have to, but I think it makes sense to. Things like Plasma or
Phonon or Akonadi or Nepomuk have some branding and notoriety around
them, so there's not much need for the extra "k". People (at least
developers) know what they are and know that they're KDE technologies.

No offense Carsten, but I doubt the same applies to this unit library.
libunitconv looks like an external dependency. libkunitconv looks like
a KDE library.

Not that this is a really that big a deal. I just didn't want to get
in trouble for just posting a "+1" to Christoph's email. ;)


More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list