phonon hassle to build WAS: Re: Policy for Dependencies

[Christoph Cullmann]

Hi,

>>> but why would you want to build a backend if you need no sound anyway?
>> Thats the point, if I don't build a backend, I don't need phonon and I can
>> save building + shipping it with just making phonon optional for knotifications,
>> which internally already is build in a way to have it optional.
> 
> So what's the hassle with phonon then? Building? Maybe I am being daft
> today but it seems to me that testing/supporting an entire alternate
> build configuration for knotification is a greater effort than
> building a library that has zero requirements on top of what
> knotification already requires and already does the same thing the
> alternate build configuration would do - i.e. abstract away things you
> might not need.
KNotifications already has that abstraction.
All output things are internal plugins.
And that abstraction is already in use there, for e.g. QtSpeech.
Why build and ship phonon for exactly no gain?
The knotifications change is 5 lines.
If we want to make frameworks attractive for 3rdparty devs, I don't understand the issue here.

Greetings
Christoph

-- 
----------------------------- Dr.-Ing. Christoph Cullmann ---------
AbsInt Angewandte Informatik GmbH      Email: cullmann at AbsInt.com
Science Park 1                         Tel:   +49-681-38360-22
66123 Saarbrücken                      Fax:   +49-681-38360-20
GERMANY                                WWW:   http://www.AbsInt.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Geschäftsführung: Dr.-Ing. Christian Ferdinand
Eingetragen im Handelsregister des Amtsgerichts Saarbrücken, HRB 11234