KF5 Update Meeting 2013-w20
steveire at gmail.com
Mon May 20 11:01:35 BST 2013
Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> there was a review request for a find-module for libusb1 here a few days
> ago, which we have already in e-c-m, but he can't use it because it is not
Then it should probably be put into kdelibs/cmake for KDE4?
> On the cmake list somebody was asking for a central place for additional
> modules or scripts, 4 or 5 weeks ago.
I think I've seen the topic come up from time to time, even longer ago than
4-5 weeks. That's part of what motivates ecm, as you say. I don't think it's
a reason to rush a release out.
Without seeing his post, it's hard to know if it's suitable for ecm or
should be in cmake in that particular case.
> A few months ago somebody (Sune maybe ?) complained on the kde-buildsystem
> list that he can't package karchive separatly, because it needs e-c-m.
Presumably that's the Qt4 based version? That doesn't need ecm anymore.
David removed the requirement with commit
ecda35817ddaec8381a34e9bcc4d9c722bf528c7 (possibly in response to Sune?),
and you can see that it never really used anything from ecm anyway as
nothing significant from there is copied in.
> Saying "they have to keep in sync, we don't" helps creating more work and
> a proliferation of slightly different find-modules.
> The purpose of e-c-m is to fight that.
Still no reason to rush a release imo.
More information about the kde-core-devel