Blacklisting of PIM from the CI system

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On dinsdag 3 december 2019 22:13:43 CET Allen Winter wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 3, 2019 2:52:31 PM EST Volker Krause wrote:
> > The complexity of the dependency graph is also a problem for onboarding new 
> > people, and with kdelibs4support gone IMHO the largest technical dept here. 
> > It's being worked on, albeit slowly, currently we are losing ~1 module per 
> > release I think.
> >
> Silly questions
> 
> Why do we need 50-60 repos to build kontact?
> why not 1 repo for kontact and all its stuff? (I miss kdepim)
> 
> do Krita or any of the other large applications have so many repositories devoted to them?

Krita is just one repo. Of course, we've got our own little complications when it comes to building on binary factory , but for CI that's not relevant.

> After all these years since the svn->git move I still understand why so many repostitories for Kontact.
> For frameworks it makes sense, but I don't get it for applications


-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | https://www.valdyas.org | https://www.krita.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 195 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20191204/76a21230/attachment.sig>