Plasma 5.2 bits for kdereview

[Luigi Toscano]

David Edmundson ha scritto:
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 5:54 PM, Luigi Toscano <luigi.toscano at tiscali.it
> <mailto:luigi.toscano at tiscali.it>> wrote:
> 
>     Jonathan Riddell ha scritto:
>     > On Thu, Jan 08, 2015 at 07:33:58AM -0200, Lamarque Souza wrote:
>     >>    Regarding ModemManagerQt, libbluedevil, libkscreen and baloo, they are
>     >>    supposed to be frameworks stuff (not sure about baloo) but they are not
>     >>    ready yet. Why not created a frameworks-next group to include them there
>     >>    until they are ready to move to frameworks (being it KF5 or even KF6 in
>     >>    the future)? The Linux kernel has such a thing and it seems to work for
>     >>    them.
>     >
>     > It's doubtful if they'll ever be ready for Frameworks which has strict
>     > quality requirements. Setting up yet another place to put them just
>     > means yet another person has to work out the release management bits
>     > and the distros need to package them separately.  I don't see any
>     > problem it solves and I do see extra work by not just making them
>     > officially part of Plasma.
> 
>     Yes, of course having a different place requires some changes to the release
>     tools. Please note that having them in a different place does not mean they
>     can't released _for now_ at the same time as another big package like Plasma
>     (and go with a different release schedule when needed).
> 
>     I still think that having this kind of modules (libraries) formally separated
>     is coherent with the vision of the post-kdelibs4 world.
> 
>     That said, there is no consensus here, as it seems I'm expressing I'm part of
>     a minority view and I'm not in the release team, if no one else says anything
>     else I would stop here for this specific case. If the problem surfaces again
>     in future for more and more modules, I would raise it again.
> 
> 
> FWIW, I think it's a good idea. 
> I  just don't think it's viable to be discussing it the day we tag a release.
> 
> If it's something you want to push for, raise it before another problem
> surfaces, as otherwise it'll just be too late to do anything again. 

I raised this issue three weeks ago. Yes, holidays and so on, but then the
release could have been a bit far away from the holidays to account for this
kind of thing. This means now moving stuff around from one module anyway, and
back again if this is implemented.

I'm done.

Bye
-- 
Luigi