Separating everything ?

[Frank Reininghaus]

Hi Patrick,

2013/2/8 Patrick Spendrin:
> Am 07.02.2013 23:32, schrieb Frank Reininghaus:
> ...
>
> Since I am reading this thread by chance, I might as well reply.
>
> One of the reasons of splitting kdelibs into separate repositories is to
> simplify the usage of single modules.
> From the perspective of a full *KDE* desktop, there is no problem in
> building & using all of kdelibs, since each library will be used several
> times from several applications.
>
> If you do not have a full *KDE* desktop (running a single KDE
> application on a gnome desktop or maybe the wish to use KDE technology
> in your Qt application), this will not be the case, and you will
> generate overhead. Of course the overhead can be cut down by (1)
> splitting kdelibs either at buildtime (by switching libraries on or off
> at cmake time) or (2)after building it (currently done by some distros
> to some extend). For KDE on Windows e.g. (1) will bring the overhead of
> having a complete kdelibs package for rather tiny libraries and (2) is
> simply forbidden by missing manpower.

thanks, but I'm afraid you misunderstood me. I never said that one
should be forced to build the entire thing (or circumvent that by
switching off libraries).

My idea was to have all frameworks in subfolders of the "kdelibs" or
"kde-frameworks" repository which can be built, used, installed and
released separately. The only change for people who want the latest
code from git would be that they clone not multiple repositories, but
just one, and then cd to the framework(s) they need, build and install
them. The only overhead would be the unused source code of the other
frameworks on the hard drive.

I see that there is a fear that a big repository will keep people from
contributing to a single framework. I can't quite imagine that this is
the case, but considering that I'm apparently the only one, I guess we
should better stop wasting time with this discussion and get back to
work.

Best regards,
Frank