KIO progress towards tier 1 framework?

[Kevin Ottens]

Hello,

On Tuesday 02 July 2013 22:06:20 Chusslove Illich wrote:
> > [: Kevin Ottens :]
> > Note that apparently there's no interest from the maintainer in making
> > ki18n tier1 (ktranscript plugin being part of it and depending on kjs)...
> > Which would make KIO tier3. You might want either to discuss with
> > Chusslove or consider using tr() I'm afraid.
> 
> In the case of JavaScript interpreter, ki18n can either depend on QtScript
> or on KJS; either way that is one dependency extra, and I'd rather stick
> with KJS. This is because I don't like the drama with JavaScript engines, in
> which Qt must participate, while KJS can remain its "boring self". I
> consider this outweighing the advantage of a tier 1 label.

Your choice. Means the set of frameworks which will use ki18n will be reduced 
though. Maybe not a big deal, our needs for advanced i18n features are likely 
not as high there than in applications (I'm unsure about that statement 
honestly).
 
> Then, ki18n should also begin to depend on a locale and on a config
> provider, and to me it is still unclear which these will be.

For locale it should be QLocale really. KLocale is likely to disappear at some 
point. QLocale might not fulfill all your needs yet, but we'd need to know 
what you miss sooner than later.

Regarding the config provider, what use do you have for it in ki18n? I'll 
likely end up to be KConfigCore, no real alternative available there... I'm 
just wondering if that dependency could be managed differently though.

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

Sponsored by BlueSystems and KDAB to work on KDE Frameworks
-------------- 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/20130710/2050345d/attachment.sig>