Proposal to improving KDE Software Repository Organization

[Ben Cooksley]

On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 6:55 PM, David Faure <faure at kde.org> wrote:
> Nice work.

Thanks.

>
> Just one thing:
>
> On Monday 18 August 2014 21:54:40 Michael Pyne wrote:
>>   So "kf5-qt5" might mean "KF5/Devel, Plasma5/Devel, etc." while
>>   "kf5-qt5-stable" might mean "KF5/Devel, Plasma5/Stable, etc.".
>
> This looks like an attempt to keep the current branch-group naming for
> compatibility and ease of transition. But I fear it makes things harder to
> understand in the longer term.

It is for compatibility - yes.
The old kf5-qt5 / latest-qt4 names are being mapped to division /
track combinations. They are otherwise not used.

> Would who guess that kf5-qt5 means plasma devel, since the name says nothing
> about plasma?
>
> I think the concept works, but the actual naming of the divisions should be
> improved, even if it means we need to update our kdesrc-buildrc files (or some
> compat code maps from old names to new names).
>
> Plasma5Devel-KF5 and Plasma5Stable-KF5 would already be better names for the
> divisions .... but then what happens with apps on top? :)

Each application grouping would have it's own division.

Just a clarification though: there would only be two divisions for the
above scenario: Plasma5 and KF5.
Plasma5 would then have two tracks: stable and devel. KF5 would have
it's single track.

> I guess the divisions will include apps in the same state as plasma?
> So this is really AppsAndPlasmaDevel-KF5 and AppsAndPlasmaStable-KF5,
> both quite unreadable :)
> (Just Devel-KF5 and Stable-KF5 would make one thing the adjective applies to
> KF5, so no go)
>
> Sorry for starting a naming bikeshed, but I fear that the divison concept
> won't work out well if we can't find proper names for the "divisions", because
> then people will keep getting confused about what's in them.

KF5 will have the frameworks in it.
Plasma5 will have those repositories which form part of the Plasma 5
workspace, and are released as "Plasma 5".
Everything else will go in other divisions.

KDevelop for instance would probably have it's own division. As would
Calligra, even though it is only one repository. I imagine PIM would
have it's own as well (covering kdepim and kdepim-runtime).

How the current generation modules group themselves as divisions would
be up to them ultimately.

>
> --
> David Faure, faure at kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
> Working on KDE Frameworks 5
>

Thanks,
Ben