[announce] KSecretsService into it's way to be released

[Valentin Rusu]

On 11/11/2011 03:24 PM, Olivier Goffart wrote:
>> Yes, I'll take that suggestion. But is the frameworks branch working
>> right now?
>> Is it possible to use it as the main desktop session on my computer, on
>> a day-to-day basis?
> The frameworks branch is not meant to be used in the short term
> (it may work, but I don't know)
> But it is to be used for development.

So, I may switch my desktop environment to it right now?

>
> There is a lot of work to do there, and little people to do the work.
> What's not helping is that  lots of developer are like you and want to get
> their feature used as soon as possible (nothing to blame here). So they stick
> to 4.x rather than doing work in the framework branch.

Well, I actually need this feature for my secrets management, and I'm 
not the only one who wants the secret sync tool I proposed. If the 
frameworks schedule is so far ahead, I think that'll be better to let it 
go into kdelibs, as I started it, then I'll start helping you with the 
frameworks. I'm very keen to help you, but I don't have the detailed 
knowledge you have on KDE core.

>
> That's the reason why kdelibs is frozen, it is to force developper like you to
> contribute (and hence tests) the framework.

But I'm wiling to switch to frameworks. I'm also wiling to help develop 
it. Only I have quite a gap to escalate to reach to your level in KDE 
core knowledge and working on this API helped me a lot. Perhaps some 
guidance my help/task dispatching may help me getting into it. But I 
need my secret sync tool meanwhile :-)

> Because by running in frameworks, you will maybe see bugs in other areas of
> the framework, and i am sure people on irc are there to help.

People on IRC are great.

>> FYI, Telepathy team is waiting for this new feature to be released. They
>> are my first "real" users and already provided some feedback/bug reports
>> about the deamon.
> That's great.
> But as far as i know, Thelepathy is in the same situation as you. Meaning they
> can use the secretservice libraries without them to be within kdelibs.
>
>

Ok - I'm adjusting my view while writing this mail.  So here is my proposal:
- remove all of the ksecretsservice code from kdelibs and kde-runtime,
- do not remove kwallet.cpp code I added for the ksecretsservice 
infrastructure; also let the check box in the corresponding kcm - that 
will be easier for those wiling to test this new infrastructure and it 
has no effect by default,
- continue maintaining ksecretsservice related code in 
kdelibs/4.8/kwallet.cpp,
- create an extragear (or playground?) repository holding all the 
ksecretsservice related stuff ; I cannot use the old repo, as it's name 
is slightly different,
- documentint it on techbase.kde.org site


-- 
Valentin Rusu (IRC valir, KDE vrusu)
KSecretsService (former KSecretService, KWallet replacement)