Merging repositories

[Kevin Funk]

On Friday, 28 July 2017 17:32:59 CEST Aleix Pol wrote:
> Dear KDevelopers,
> During the BoF we were discussing whether it would make sense to merge
> kdev-python and kdev-php like we did with kdev-clang and kdev-qmljs.

I'm not that sure about merging these language plugins into kdevelop.git, 
though. Despite the pros mentioned it also has a couple of drawbacks:

- It does not scale -- what happens if e.g. kdev-rust (which has another 
external dependency) is getting included into the KDevelop release?
- Speaking about dependencies: In kdevelop.git we'll pull in more and more 
dependencies by time. This is difficult for distro packagers and they'll 
probably hate it. I've already seen packagers having an issue with KDevelop 
having a hard-dependency on libclang.

I know it's difficult to counter the argument "kdev-clang & kdev-qmljs have 
made it into kdevelop.git, so why not kdev-python & kdev-php?". But I still 
consider KDevelop itself to be a C++-IDE by definition, every other language 
it supports is just an extra plugin (which should be kept in a different 
repository).

A couple of others seem to have concerns about this merge as well.

> Furthermore, we discussed whether it would make sense to merge
> kdevplatform into kdevelop because:
> - nobody is using the abstraction
> - will definitely simplify the steps to take by new contributors

I quite like the idea of merging KDevelop and KDevplatform though. +1 on that 
one. The reasons *for* it have been mentioned already in other subthreads.

No objections on that one.

> Thoughts?
> Aleix


-- 
Kevin Funk | kfunk at kde.org | http://kfunk.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kdevelop-devel/attachments/20170731/546399a3/attachment.sig>