KDevelop and Frameworks

Miquel Sabaté mikisabate at gmail.com
Fri Jul 4 11:32:22 UTC 2014


It's fine with me too. Yesterday I tried to update my KF5 toolchain to
include KDevelop. The build was succesful but KDevelop crashed on start, so
I guess that I have to keep working on my toolchain :)


2014-07-04 12:15 GMT+02:00 Aleix Pol <aleixpol at kde.org>:

> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Milian Wolff <mail at milianw.de> wrote:
>> On Friday 04 July 2014 01:08:13 Aleix Pol wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > I just saw Alexander Richardson review request about deprecated
>> KSharedPtr
>> > and first thing I thought "why didn't I do that already?". Well, the
>> > thinking behind was to do a minimalistic port [1] while features were
>> > developed in master, so we could merge back easily.
>> >
>> > KDevelop 4.7 has been branched now, KF 5.0 has been released, so it's a
>> > good moment to put it on the table.
>> > How do you guys feel about a: git merge frameworks?
>> Fine with me. I'll work on 1.7 until its released anyways and that should
>> give
>> me enough time to setup a kf5 toolchain.
>> Speaking of which, we will have to update our wiki HowToCompile page, and
>> at
>> least announce it also on our user lists, the planet and our website.
>> There
>> are, after all, a lot of people who build kdev* from master. Furthermore,
>> I
>> would appreciate it, if either of those who successfully built KDevelop
>> frameworks can document that in every detail. Paste your kdesrc-buildrc
>> and
>> dependent included configuration files. Create a list of frameworks that
>> KDevelop requires.
>> Also, I'm not sure how much master and 1.7 diverged. If there happened a
>> lot,
>> I vote for branching off master into a "legacy" branch just for people
>> that
>> stick to KDE 4 for now. Feature development will go to master/kf5 of
>> course.
>> Finally, I want to know what our GSOC students think of this (CC'ed).
>> Would it
>> be OK for you to setup a KF5 toolchain and continue your work there? If
>> not, I
>> guess it would be fine if we go the "legacy" way proposed above, and
>> you'll
>> continue your work there. Once GSOC is over, we can merge/rebase it on
>> frameworks.
>> Bye
> That's a good point, maybe it would be interesting to wait until GSoC is
> over to release a 4.8 version, so users can take advantage of the on-going
> GSoC projects.
> I don't think the GSoC students should change the platform they work on in
> the middle of the project.
> Aleix
> _______________________________________________
> KDevelop-devel mailing list
> KDevelop-devel at kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kdevelop-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20140704/c099a57e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the KDevelop-devel mailing list