Moving kdevelop4-custom-buildsystem to g.k.o

[Milian Wolff]

Andreas Pakulat, 26.11.2010:
> On 25.11.10 21:01:21, David Nolden wrote:
> > 2010/11/25 Milian Wolff <mail at milianw.de>:
> > > David Nolden, 25.11.2010:
> > >> 2010/11/23 Milian Wolff <mail at milianw.de>:
> > >> > Imo all of this should be met for a plugin in the "plugins" folder:
> > >> > 
> > >> > a) active maintainer who cares about bug fixes etc.
> > >> > b) a first release, since that makes it clear that the maintainer is
> > >> > confident it is in a "production ready" state
> > >> 
> > >> c) stable, meet some quality standards (we should release stuff that
> > >> works, not stuff that _might_ work)
> > >> 
> > >> Or alternatively, the plugin should be important enough to be
> > >> considered a crucial part of the IDE. What does this plugin do?
> > > 
> > > Hehe, I find that one quite funny. What do you mean with "stable"? Who
> > > decides that? And why must it be stable to be in it's own git repo (we
> > > are not talking about merging it into either kdevelop or kdevplatform
> > > repository here, are we?).
> > > 
> > > It's the maintainer who is responsible for that plugin, if he releases
> > > it and it's utter crap, people will note that and report it to him.
> > 
> > Sorry, I'm talking about merging it into KDevelop/KDevplatform of
> > course. Every somewhat maintained plugin should ideally be somewhere
> > in our git repository.
> 
> While I'm willing to maintain it for the foreseeable future, I'm not
> using it as much as I'd like (though the next few weeks might be
> changing things again). Hence I'm not sure about moving it to kdevelop
> (kdevplatform would be wrong IMHO as its of no use to Quanta for
> example). I'll leave that decision to the community, but I'd like to
> make clear that I currently don't have any plans for new features but
> will be fixing any bugs that anybody finds (there's no b.k.o entry yet,
> will do that once it moved).

Since you told me quite often that it's stable and since it reuses the generic 
manager which is of course maintained by me, I'd say +1 from me. I just wonder 
whether we should ship it with 4.2, I'd be more confident with 4.3.

And I'll forward bugs to you of course, this is btw. my evil plan to get you 
back to hack on KDevelop :P

Bye
-- 
Milian Wolff
mail at milianw.de
http://milianw.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20101126/f8c25246/attachment.sig>