[PATCH] kdevelop subversion part patch

Andreas Pakulat apaku at gmx.de
Mon Feb 26 10:52:58 UTC 2007

On 26.02.07 17:39:41, dukju ahn wrote:
> 2007/2/26, Andreas Pakulat <apaku at gmx.de>:
> > On 25.02.07 11:07:12, dukju ahn wrote:
> > > These patches are against KDE-3.5 and KDevelop-3.4 branches.
> > > Although KDE/KDevelop is moving to 4.0, our users will use only
> > > 3.X  stable branches  for a considerable period. (at least october 07)
> > >
> > >
> > > 0. Checkout kdesdk-3.5 module. We need only kdesdk-3.5/kioslave subdirectory.
> > >
> > > 1. There are two files in tar.gz file.
> > > kdev-svn.patch       will go to KDevelop-3.4 branch and
> > > ioslave-svn.patch   will go to kdesdk-3.5 branch.
> >
> > Ok, I just looked through the ioslave patch quickly and I don't think we
> > will get this one into kdesdk. Its too large and its not in /trunk
> > already. Do you see a way of transferring some of that stuff into
> > kdevelop?
> Yes, It is very easy to transfer some of ioslave's stuff into kdevelop.
> Actually, KDevelop needs 3 files -- just svn.cpp / svn.h and svn.protocol files.
> We don't need the whole kioslave-svn plugin.
> If we choose this option, we can act independently from the restriction of
> other's old api. This is a big merit.
> However, kioslave-svn plugin is directly linked to subversion library. If
> kdevelop contains these 3 files, then kdevelop will require
> libsvn-devel packages
> to be compiled.

Thats not what I meant in the first place. I mean to still use kdesdk
ioslave without patching it, but haing the new features in kdevelop.
Wether we should duplicate the kdesdk-ioslave code or not I can't
decide, we should put that up in a separate thread when we discover that
we can't modify the ioslave as much as we need...

> > Another problem is that the kdesdk-ioslave is not the
> > only ioslave for kde-svn support, there's another one which currently
> > also works (and the Ui that delivers it is much more usable than
> > konqueror+kdesdk-ioslave) - except for importing new projects, for which
> > there's an upstream bugreport already. I suggest that if you absolutely
> > need to change the ioslave-api talk to the author of kdesvn and try to
> > convince him to change his ioslave too.
> Should the ioslave from kdesdk be compatible with ioslave from kdesvn?

Its the other way around, the kdesvn-ioslave tries to be compatible with
the on from kdesdk (although it already lacks import-support)

> If so, It would be a big problem. If we stick to the old api, I cannot add
> many new features planned.
> These APIs are based on the early version of subversion.
> And they even do not support full API of such old version.
> ( such as setprop, getprop, listprop, ... )

Ok, then I suggest to talk to the maintainer of the kdesdk ioslave
wether he agree's to add all these new API's.
> Now, which action should I take now? Before the stable release of KDE
> or KDevelop are closed, I want to stabilize and add subversion part
> frequently.

Don't worry, neither the KDevelop nor the KDE stable branches will be
closed anytime soon (I was obviously wrong on that), so you still have
plenty of time.


There will be big changes for you but you will be happy.

More information about the KDevelop-devel mailing list