Fwd: Re: [Kde-cvs-announce] Dev Platform Tagging Freeze Next Week

Tom Albers tomalbers at kde.nl
Wed Nov 7 13:23:32 CET 2007


At Wednesday 07 November 2007 13:03, you wrote:
> Am Mittwoch 07 November 2007 schrieb Thomas Zander:
> > On Wednesday 07 November 2007 11:34:05 Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 07 November 2007 09:51:50 Tom Albers wrote:
> > > > It's news to me too.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think this should be done this way. kdesupport follows kdelibs
> > > > release path.
> > > >
> > > > So they should not use trunk kdesupport to work on the next version. In
> > > > case they want to work on the next version, maybe they should move to
> > > > extragear/libs like any other application/library.
> > >
> > > We need to document that then (adding qca2 to the techbase build
> > > instructions then). If we switch to a released qca in this state, it'd
> > > also need some testing.
> >
> > Wasn't the original reason for kdesupport to put code there that was
> > required for building KDE?
> Somewhen in '98 - yes. But that doesn't mean the original reason for 
> kdesupport is still the current one.
> 
> And no, our policy is that we only put into kdesupport what is not available 
> elsewhere.

I think that thanks to our releases up to now, all distro's have packaged qca(2) now, that's why I proposed to move it to extragear now.

> > In light of that concept the stable version should stay in kdesupport.  I
> > doubt Tom wanted to remove it from kdesupport.

Well, more or less. Either there is a stable - essential/required - version in kdesupport and a development branch somewhere else or qca moves to extragear/libs and releases tarballs reguallary which are the requirement for kde. 

What I would not like is a version of qca in kdesupport which *can not* or should not be used to compile kdelibs (as seem to be the case now). kdesupport should support kdelibs at any time, hence follow its release schedule.

Toma


More information about the release-team mailing list