[Kde-graphics-devel] ksnapshot: KIPI_FOUND?

[Gregor Mi]

On 29/11/14 23:51, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> There are not too much difference between master and frameworks from
> API, as KUrl to QUrl, and path() to url().

True. Plus some minor changes in CMakeLists.txt and other things. With my current setup it
would be almost duplicate work if I would maintain two review requests (git rebase yields
too many merge conflicts for my taste). So my idea was to work towards a "Ship it" for the
current review request in frameworks and then look into the backporting to the master branch.

> lib is mostly ported and work, some plugins too, and at least
> helloworld plugin ready for tests in client KIPI applications.

Side question: libkipi is currently not yet integrated into the default build of
kdesrcbuild - one has to specify it manually, right?

> Look KF5 port wiki page for details :
> 
> https://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Digikam/CodingSprint2014#KDE_Framework_Port
> 
> Gilles Caulier
> 
> 2014-11-29 23:46 GMT+01:00 Gregor Mi <codestruct at posteo.org>:
>> On 08/11/14 12:57, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
>>> On Saturday, November 8, 2014 11.01:41 Gregor Mi wrote:
>>>> On 03/11/14 19:17, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday, November 2, 2014 18.49:33 Gregor Mi wrote:
>>>>>> when you built ksnapshot, was KIPI_FOUND defined? I installed
>>>>>> libkipi-devel but KIPI_FOUND was not set. So is this macro still in use?
>>>>>
>>>>> Which branch? master should find and use kipi. For the frameworks branch,
>>>>> however, I am not aware of a Qt5 port of libkipi (master is Qt4 based and
>>>>> there is no frameworks branch) so the Frameworks 5 version of ksnapshot
>>>>> does not yet use kipi.
>>>>
>>>> I used the frameworks branch.
>>>
>>> aha ... that would explain it.
>>>
>>>> What would you suggest that should be done with the review request [Fill
>>>> SendTo menu async to fix "Bug 312495 - Very slow 'Send to'
>>>> menu"](https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/120920/) which also affects
>>>> kipi code? Let it rest until kipi is ported Qt5 or try to apply it on
>>>> the Qt4 master?
>>>
>>> As I wrote in my review on the request, I think this could eventually go into
>>> both master (where it is easier to test and can benefit people using the 4.x
>>> version) and frameworks. Little should need to be changed in the patch between
>>> the two branches.
>>> If you don't have kdelibs 4.x available on your system to develop against let
>>> me know and I can do it ...
>>
>> Thanks for the explanation. I have the kdelibs 4.x available and I put some time into
>> backporting the current review request also for 4.x but I did not succeed. There are too
>> many differences beween master and frameworks. So I would stick to frameworks for now. I
>> assume you did not have the time to look into the latest version of the request yet? :)
>>
>> Gregor