Proposal to improving KDE Software Repository Organization

Luigi Toscano luigi.toscano at
Sun Aug 16 22:36:33 BST 2015

David Faure ha scritto:
> On Sunday 16 August 2015 13:51:29 Michael Pyne wrote:
>> There's no reason even with our current build metadata that we'd *have* to 
>> have project hierarchies, as long as each underlying git repository name 
>> remains unique. It might even make things easier since there would be no way 
>> for a sub-path in our project hierarchy (such as kde/kdelibs/kactivities) to 
>> mask a git repository name (kdelibs in this case).
> Ben and I discussed it today and we think there is usefulness in one level of subtree within the
> Applications product, to be able to keep the 'groups' like kdegraphics, kdemultimedia etc. which
> are useful in order to have a maintainer per 'group' (as reinforced by the release team recently).
> But yes, only one level, and AFAICS only useful in Applications.
> kactivities (to pick your example) would be "at the root of" Frameworks, no sub-path needed.
Does it mean a giant big blob for extragear and playground? Translation-wise,
having the 'groups' is really useful to not get lost.

Also, when phabricator support subproject, using groups would be useful again
to not have a big blob of projects (it was one of the few complains I recorded
for phabricator, the big list of projects).


More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list