Which package will provide the common KDE library version number ?

[Kevin Ottens]

Hello,

On Sunday 19 February 2012 20:10:05 Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> > Can KDE frameworks libraries of different versions be mixed together ?
> 
> I would say that's unsupported (by us). The ones that work together are
> released together.
> 
> We're not going to test all possible (and numerous) version combinations. We
> don't need to make it impossible, but we don't need to ensure that it
> always works either.
> 
> If someone else decides that they want some random version combination to
> work (for a reason I can't think of), they can maintain that combination.

+1
 
> > E.g. can I build a tier2 library against different versions of tier1
> > libraries, or does this in general only work if they have the same version
> > ? If so, they wouldn't necessarily share the same KDE frameworks version
> > number...
> > 
> > 
> > Can I install different libraries from the KDE frameworks set of libraries
> > to different locations and use them together ?
> 
> I don't see why not. As long as CMAKE_PREFIX_PATH has the correct content.

+1

> > If the answer to these questions is yes, then KDE frameworks is really
> > just a set of loosely coupled libraries, which of course can have
> > different versions.
> 
> Yes, but the KDE applications and workspaces will use one version of all the
> frameworks that they use.

Exactly. I'll stress it again though: with KDE Frameworks, KDE Applications 
are one of the possible downstreams, we want to have others which have more a 
profile of "Qt + a couple extras".

> > If the answer is no, i.e. if these libraries should still be seen as one
> > coherent package,
> 
> I would say that from the perspective of a developer creating a KDE
> application, it is one coherent package.
> 
> From the perspective of a Qt application developer who wants (for example)
> to be able to create zip files (using karchive) or some extra itemmodels
> classes, the libraries are distinct.

+1

> > then there should be a package they all depend on,
> 
> I don't follow the logic from 'they can be seen as one package' to 'they
> must share a common dependency'.

Me neither, and I don't think it got addressed. Alex could you clarify on 
that? It could perhaps help me in understanding why you want that common 
dependency so badly in that case (I really mean the version numbering here, 
the common dependencies like ECM and Qt are probably a very different story).

Regards.
-- 
Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net

KDAB - proud patron of KDE, http://www.kdab.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20120222/a2c6c13b/attachment.sig>