Review Request 128284: supporting the -iframework and -F header search path options

[René J.V. Bertin]

> On June 27, 2016, 10:44 a.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
> > Please push this once the other one is accepted. Then, after you pushed this one, wait for the CI to finish compiling KDevPlatform, then push your other changeset to KDevelop.
> > 
> > Using `Directories` as suffix is OK to me.
> 
> René J.V. Bertin wrote:
>     This time I'm a bit confused:
>     - should I change something in the naming or not?
>     - if not, I don't touch this anymore until I pushed the KDevplatform companion patch and am sure the CI didn't choke on it, and then I push this changeset?
>     
>     I sometimes get build failure notifications from the CI but I've never seen a confirmation of success. Do I connect to it somewhere?
> 
> Milian Wolff wrote:
>     You'll have to change the naming either here or in the other changeset. Make it uniform across both, i.e. either use `frameworkDirectories` everywhere, or use `frameworkPaths` everywhere.
>     
>     Regarding sucess notifications, afaik they don't exist, you'll have to poll the website. Note that this sentence does not make sense:
>     
>     > - if not, I don't touch this anymore until I pushed the KDevplatform companion patch and am sure the CI didn't choke on it, and then I push this changeset?
>     
>     This is the KDevplatform companion patch, and it must be pushed first (once both are approved). Once succeeded, you push the KDevelop changeset.

Told you I was confused, I noticed that was even more the case than I thought just after publishing :-/ Fortunately I've got a bad cold I can blame ...

I'll let the choice simmer a bit until the brain fog clears. There is no ideal choice IMO; frameworkPaths is more compact but frameworkDirectories is probably more correct semantically.


- René J.V.


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128284/#review96882
-----------------------------------------------------------


On June 25, 2016, 12:17 p.m., René J.V. Bertin wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128284/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 25, 2016, 12:17 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDevelop.
> 
> 
> Repository: kdevplatform
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This is the KDevPlatform companion patch to the work-in-progress under review for KDevelop (https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128272/)
> 
> I have stuck with the approach used throughout this class, i.e. keep it abstract. I'd have provided a default implementation returning an empty list myself for this new feature. That would also allow to commit this patch while the other patch is in progress.
> 
> I'm a little bit uncomfortable with the mixed use of `frameworkPaths` (requested by Milian in the other RR) and `frameworkDirectories`. The latter is preferable here for reasons that seem obvious to me.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   project/interfaces/ibuildsystemmanager.h ee10c2f 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128284/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Builds and works on OS X and Linux provided the other patch is applied.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> René J.V. Bertin
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20160627/02160f6c/attachment-0001.html>