Phonon - Qt or KDE?

Harald Sitter sitter at
Sat Nov 5 21:05:47 GMT 2011

Lo' all!

Some time ago I got asked whether we'd want to move Phonon to the
qt-project infrastructure to reflect that it is not only for KDE
software but the wider Qt ecosystem.

That would mostly include:
* gerrit for code review
* jira for bugs
* whatever is going to be used instead of gitorious for hosting (FWIW:
moving back to gitorious is a no go ;))

Disadvantages that come to mind:
* KDE devs will need to get a new account to contribute to Phonon
* bugs in KDE software that are really in Phonon cannot easily be
moved within bugzilla but need to be reported on jira
* the recent merge of #phonon into #kde-multimedia would seem somewhat
weird? (thought I suppose we could get #qt-phonon ;))

Advantages that come to mind:
* easier to market Phonon as *the one and only reasonable* Qt multimedia library

Additional note on closeness to Qt:
* as Qt 5 will not contain a Phonon module anymore, but instead
developers are supposed to get it from us directly I am strongly
considering to move Phonon to qmake and reduce the amount of
not-necessary deps (automoc4 for example, which is cut by qmake itself
already) to make it *a lot* easier for people to get the latest
version and develop against that
* on a highly related matter I am not entirely opposed to the idea of
using qdoc3 instead of doxygen (which gives the advantage of writing
actually sane QML documentation and extremely magical theming for api
dox + our doxygen stuff on has been broken for the last 3
years and no one really knows why it seems)

So, what do you think? Move to qt-project or stay on KDE infrastructure?

More information about the kde-multimedia mailing list