Versioning of Frameworks

[David Faure]

On Sunday 10 May 2015 22:31:10 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> There I have Qt available, as Christian says, it feels like a system
> library, our application is built on it.

Well, I wish you would see KF5 as a natural extension of Qt, therefore "a 
system library" too, if you want to call it that.

> Now from time to time we need some additional functionality. This is the
> place where frameworks libraries could come in. The easier this is, the
> better. Easy would mean that if I need kfoo, and this depends on
> kcoreaddons and kwidgetaddons, I need to add only those three libs to my
> build, and when kfoo has a bugfix I need, I don't have to automatically
> update also kcoreaddons and kwidgetaddons, but only if this is really
> necessary (i.e. kfoo started using functionality from newer versions).

Then just grab the bugfix, or adjust the required-version if you see it 
doesn't need functionality from a newer version.

> This indeed requires that maintainers carefully maintain which versions of
> their dependencies are needed

You realize that many frameworks don't have a maintainer, right?
At least 17 have officially none, others might have an inactive one.
Are you volunteering, or just making demands for others to do work for you?

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