Making polkit-qt-1 a tier1 framework

[David Faure]

On Monday 25 January 2016 09:12:50 Martin Graesslin wrote:
> On Saturday, January 23, 2016 11:59:28 AM CET David Faure wrote:
> > On Thursday 14 January 2016 13:20:01 Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > 
> > > I want to suggest to move polkit-qt-1 [1] from kdesupport to frameworks.
> > > Reasons are:
> > > 
> > > * kdesupport is basically what became tier1 in frameworks
> > > * it's used by other frameworks, e.g. KAuth (tier 2) and in
> > > kde/workspace
> > > * polkit-qt-1 is currently in a not really released state (last release
> > > in 2014, quite a few bugfixes around)
> > > 
> > > By moving it to frameworks we get closer to getting rid of kdesupport
> > > and get the making releases problem solved once and for all: bug fixes
> > > will get to users in a timely manner.
> > > 
> > > Opinions?
> > 
> > Sounds good. A few questions come to mind:
> > 
> > - Will you be the official maintainer? (Otherwise who will?)
> 
> eh no, my domain knowledge is not enough and I already maintain too much.
> 
> My suggestion for maintainer is shared responsibility of Plasma team. Not 
> optimal, but still better than the unmaintained state it's currently in. And 
> Plasma needs polkit.

Yes that is suboptimal, but OK, it's the case for some of the existing frameworks too.
I just wanted to raise the opportunity to actually find/define a maintainer for polkit-qt-1.

> > - Is this an opportunity for a better name? I keep wondering why this lib
> > targets Qt 1 :-)
> 
> The name makes kind of sense. It's a Qt wrapper for polkit-1. If you have a 
> better name suggestion: sure, but it shouldn't cause breakage for existing 
> code.

Well, since it's moving to be a frameworks, it could be called kpolkit-1
or polkit-1-qt, if it has to be renamed anyway.
I mean I wonder if "breakage for existing code" can be avoided anyway,
when making this a proper framework.
find_package(PolkitQt5-1) will have to become find_package(KF5PolkitQt1), no?
And linking to KF5::PolkitQt1Core instead of linking to .. ${POLKITQT-1_CORE_LIBRARY} apparently
(although we could just set that var for compatibility).
Overall, there is some work to be done on making this in line with KF5 naming conventions,
and I don't think it will "cause breakage" because the unported apps will keep finding the
current polkit-qt-1 package/library. So this is an opportunity for renaming IMHO. But if I'm
the only one who is bothered by the name, I'm happy to shut up of course.

My confusion also comes from: what's the difference between kauth/cmake/FindPolkitQt.cmake
and kauth/cmake/FindPolkitQt-1.cmake? There is polkit-qt-1 and polkit-qt?

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