ktranscript plugin to frameworkintegration?

[David Faure]

On Thursday 29 November 2012 11:24:09 Chusslove Illich wrote:
> > [: David Faure :]
> > Yes, but by moving it out, the ki18n framework doesn't have a hard
> > dependency on kjs.
> 
> Well, I do consider it a hard dependency. And the fact that it is not an
> actual compile-time dependency, an optimization side effect.

I see. You don't want to risk the case where a translation (even of a simple 
message in a low-level framework) uses ktranscript, and therefore breaks 
because the plugin isn't installed.

> Also, the reason for ki18n to be tier 2 is that it "depends" on kjs, or else 
> it would be tier 1.

Exactly, the whole point of this was to make it tier 1 :-)

> > [...] but at compile time you only need ki18n. This lowers the entry bar
> > for hacking on a specific framework.
> 
> What about unit tests-to-be, which will exercise ktranscript behavior within
> ki18n? This will use specially prepared data within ki18n, and to split
> this data between ki18n and frameworkintegration would really make no sense
> (or maybe not even possible in a sane way).

I see.

Kévin: I think Chusslove makes a valid point for having ktranscript part of 
ki18n. What do you think?

-- 
David Faure, faure at kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
Sponsored by BlueSystems and KDAB to work on KDE Frameworks