KDE Builder: request for review

[christoph at cullmann.io]

Hi,

On 2024-07-15 21:50, christoph at cullmann.io wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 2024-07-15 20:13, Andrew Shark wrote:
>> You mean new python dependencies? I never added them. Oppositely, I
>> reduce them. For example, I gladly got rid of the "promise"
>> dependency.
> 
> yes, with dependencies I meant Python libs and the Python version.
> 
> There was some rather lengthy discussions before we arrived at the
> current OK situation.
> 
>> 
>> Regarding reviews, I am not against them. I just continue directly
>> committing changes that do not influence on the behavior, such as for
>> example, changes to follow pep8 rules and refactorings.
> 
> There were incompatible changes in the last months and I would really
> like to have a proper review process for larger changes in general.
> 
> And I think it must be clear that the top priority must be to stay
> compatible. If I write a howto now, I want that it still works in 2 
> years.
> 
> That doesn't mean there shall be no new features, just not breaking 
> changes.
> 
> Like we do it with Frameworks and Co. or how CMake handles that.
> 
> The build tool shall not require the user to fixup the config without
> really good reasons.
> 
> Greetings
> Christoph
> 
> (please keep the list in CC)

any feedback on that?

Greetings
Christoph

> 
>> 
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> I think before we promote this more as 'the tool to use' it would
>>>> be
>>>> nice to
>>>> get some proper review flow going to avoid we run again into
>>>> incompatible changes.
>>>> 
>>>> These got me now several times and if we promote this to be used
>>>> and
>>>> write howtos the
>>>> goal must be in my eyes no further backward incompatible changes
>>>> or
>>>> large dependency
>>>> increases without a real good reason.
>>>> 
>>>> But that is just my viewpoint.
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> any feedback on that?
>>> Thanks.