Project layout on gitorious.org
niko.sams at gmail.com
Wed Mar 31 06:40:09 UTC 2010
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 23:47, Andreas Pakulat <apaku at gmx.de> wrote:
> On 30.03.10 22:08:38, Niko Sams wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 18:25, Alexander Dymo <alexander.dymo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> IMHO we should have a KDevelop project containing kdevelop, quanta,
>> >> kdevelop-pg-qt and the plugins from extragear/sdk at the point of
>> >> moving (yes I've changed my mind about kdevelop quanta splitting again).
>> >> Everything else is in playground and should be moved on a case-by-case
>> >> basis and get its own project.
>> > 100% agree with this and everything below.
>> I think it's fine. Everything at one place sounds useful.
>> And people looking for the quanta repo will somehow manage to find it.
> Who looks for quanta anyway (currently) :)
Come on :D Quanta is a known brand and more and more distributions don't
ship quanta3 anymore. So - yes - people look for Quanta4.
But well, you are right - there isn't even an up-to-date website...
> However I do think that if its split it should come with all
> the plugins that belong to webdevelopment, i.e. also move php stuff
> there. Which would make it harder (until Quanta is released) for people
> to gather everything necessary for web development.
That is a good argument.
Let's do it that way.
One thing: how should the plugin repositories (eg. php) be named?
The name should somehow be kdevelop/quanta independent as it works for both.
just php? language-php? plugin-php? php-plugin?
More information about the KDevelop-devel