Getting ecm files from the ECM package

[Alexander Neundorf]

On Friday 01 November 2013, Mirko Boehm wrote:
> On 11/01/2013 01:53 PM, Sune Vuorela wrote:
> >> So far we chose the "have it in cmake/ecm" route. If we had what Mirko =
> >> 
> >> > refers=20
> >> > to, then that'd open the door to another solution.
> > 
> > And it would open the first door towards alienating linux distributions.
> > 
> > Of course, we could say "and so what?". But that is our current primary
> > way of getting our stuff to our users - so we shouldn't put obstacles in
> > their way.
> > 
> > Maven, ruby and stuff is all communities where there seem to be a strong
> > tension with the linux distributions over issues like this. Let's not
> > try to embrace that.
> 
> Sune,
> 
> with what I have suggested, there would be no difference for distributions
> regarding ECM.
> 
> Now, they have to get ECM installed and tell CMake where to find it.
> 
> Then, they will have to get the ECM repo installed, and tell CMake where to
> find it.
> 
> For the offline case, I do not see a big difference. I don't want to
> downplay the concerns, but I think the problem is manageable.

...depending on if/how we want to do that:
we could start simple: search for ecm in KDECMakeSettings.cmake using the 
normal find_package() command, and if not found, download in some way. There 
may be a switch to disable that downloading.
This would, at least in the beginning, not really be a generic way for cmake 
to fetch find-modules, it would be basically a convenience so that KDE 
developers can do

find_package(tier0-KF5)

... do stuff

instead of

find_package(ECM)
find_package(tier0-KF5)

If it turns out to work good, it may turn into something more generic later.

This would still not at all force ECM or tier0-KF5 as a dependency on any user 
of KF5 libraries. It even would not force ECM as dependency to all KF5 
libraries, they could still disable it if wanted.

Alex