Move most of kdesupport to extragear

[Matt Rogers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Nov 10, 2007, at 4:17 PM, Justin Karneges wrote:

> On Saturday 10 November 2007 1:09 pm, Allen Winter wrote:
>> On Saturday 10 November 2007 10:14:04 Tom Albers wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> As a conclusion to the thread this week I want to propose to move
>>> everything   except kdewin32   to extragear/libs.
>>>
>>> The reason is that as far as i know all libs in there have provided
>>> tarballs which are the requirement for KDE. KDE does not depend on
>>> kdesupport anymore, but on those tarballs as some projects have  
>>> not been
>>> following the release schedule of kdelibs.
>>>
>>> Without objections before next wednesday, I will start  
>>> preparations to do
>>> the move the monday after that. We need to inform kde-core-devel and
>>> adjust techbase articles.
>>
>> Since these libs are not KDE-based, then they probably don't  
>> belong in
>> extragear. And we are so close to the release.. I'm afraid to muck  
>> too much
>> with things right now.
>>
>> If the packages are willing to go along with the KDE release  
>> schedule,
>> then I think they should stay in kdesupport.  If they want a  
>> completely
>> different schedule then we need to do something else.
>
> I always thought kdesupport held projects "close to KDE" but were  
> essentially
> independent.  For example, taglib is also released independently, I  
> think?
>
> So this idea of trunk having to stay synced with the KDE release  
> schedule is
> news to me.  I just thought we had to have API/ABI stable tarballs  
> ready
> before KDE (which I succeeded at).  Moving independent projects out of
> kdesupport does seem like a policy change to me, but then maybe I  
> never
> understood the kdesupport policy in the first place...
>

This was my interpretion as well. My personal opinion is that we  
shouldn't be doing any releasing with kdesupport at all, but perhaps  
we're changing things for KDE 4 and I just missed that particular  
announcement.

> If it is decided that projects should be moved out, please let me  
> know in
> advance so I can consider possible arrangements.  I could even just  
> move qca
> back into my own repository, which is where it was before Brad  
> Hards invited
> me to kdesupport.
>
>> In the case of qca, Justin makes it pretty clear that version  
>> 2.0.0 is what
>> they expect people to use in KDE4.0.0.  So... I think the best  
>> thing to do
>> is: 1) remove qca from the kdesupport/CMakeLists.txt
>>  2) change the build instructions to say that qca should be  
>> installed from
>>       distribution packages or from source code
>>  3) leave the rest of kdesupport as is
>
> Sounds safe.
>
> -Justin
- --
Matt


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFHN9W6A6Vv5rghv0cRAiuMAKCwvl+SuFDmxpYfpPFEmFedGeYBSgCgkKCX
6DXDG7Ov9qtOzx0Tay/8S5I=
=0ycV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----