Application usage statistics and targeted user surveys

[Aleix Pol]

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 12:27 AM, Albert Astals Cid <aacid at kde.org> wrote:
> El dissabte, 3 de juny de 2017, a les 11:49:00 CEST, Volker Krause va
> escriure:
>> On Thursday, 25 May 2017 12:33:49 CEST Volker Krause wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, 23 May 2017 18:31:35 CEST Aleix Pol wrote:
>> > > I would have looked into fixing it, but I'm not sure I understand why
>> > > there's all the RPATH logic in place, so I'd prefer to hear from you
>> > > first.
>> >
>> > I have removed the remains of the pre-ECM rpath handling. This also
>> > changed
>> > binary output directories on Linux to follow KDE standards, so you might
>> > want to do a clean build to avoid issues with outdated binaries in the
>> > build dir.
>> >
>> > > A good next step would also be to get it running on build.kde.org, so
>> > > we can identify these issues.
>> >
>> > Indeed, I've requested CI coverage now.
>>
>> Looks like in order to get CI coverage we need to move to kdereview (which
>> is fine, I think it's ready for that), but that requires to know where this
>> should end up afterwards.
>>
>> I guess the candidates are extragear/libs or frameworks? frameworks seems
>> conceptually like the right place, but putting something there that is still
>> fairly new and has seen little field testing seems sub-optimal. Opinions?
>
> To me it seems a few releases from extragear would make sense before moving to
> frameworks and promise full API/ABI compatibility.
>
> OTOH when moving from extreagear to frameworks we may have to rename library
> (to have the KF5 suffix) which would break also API (at least at the cmake
> level).
>
> How do people feel having libs in extreager having the KF5 "cmake naming" in
> the understanding that we're stabilizing them to be part of frameworks
> eventually?

IMO it's a bit weird and unsettling. But then, we're already doing it
for many pim libraries (not in extragear but in applications, still
not part of KF5).

Aleix