Kate App/Part/KWrite => kate.git

[Tom Albers]

----- Original Message -----
> On Saturday 29 January 2011 15:24:57 Tom Albers wrote:
> > > > No really.
> > > >
> > > > Actually my (or the kate teams) plan was:
> > > >
> > > > - remove Kate Part + App + KWrite from their current places
> > > > - keep ktexteditor where it is (to have BC+SC kept) and have a
> > > > small
> > > > copy
> > > > in kate.git to allow easier development (which I will keep in
> > > > sync
> > > > with
> > > > the REAL on in kdelibs
> > > > - have kate.git packaged as kate.tar whatever with kde releases
> > >
> > > So the kate.git package will "conflict" with the kdelibs one as
> > > both
> > > will
> > > provide ktexteditor? Well, i guess you can have some smart cmake
> > > hackery to
> > > fix this issue (though i'm really oposed to duplicate code i won't
> > > block the
> > > transition because of that)
> I will change the current CMakeLists.txt to only build ktexteditor if
> one
> explicitly requests it (like -DBUILD_KTEXTEDITOR=1) and document that
> for
> people wanting standalone kate.git development on older kdelibs).
> This would avoid problems for any non-kate developer or packager with
> conflicting installed stuff.
> 
> > >
> > > > I have no problem to be moved to extragear, but I would like to
> > > > remain in
> > > > the normal KDE SC release.
> > > >
> > > > And I don't see this as a special wish, given for example kdesdk
> > > > will for
> > > > sure split anyway up, why is it a problem if kate splits out
> > > > first?
> > > > How
> > > > will other split modules be handled? I have no problem if kate
> > > > stays
> > > > in
> > > > the "kdesdk" group, if there is any or any other toplevel group.
> > > > I
> > > > not
> > > > insist on some toplevel "kate whatever" thing, just a place
> > > > where
> > > > the
> > > > kate.git can be and be packaged with the KDE release.
> > >
> > > Ok, misunderstanding from my side then, having kate.git inside
> > > extragear-
> > > devtools or maybe kde-runtime (since it provides kwrite and
> > > katepart
> > > that for
> > > me are "basics" especially katepart) totally works for me (and my
> > > l10n
> > > concern
> > > is vanished)
> >
> > Great! The only problem that remains is the releasing bit. But we
> > can work
> > that out later I guess. I like the suggestion to put it here:
> > https://projects.kde.org/projects/kde/kdebase
> >
> > I'ld even would suggest doing it today, since all devels need to
> > re-setup
> > their build system anyhow.
> I have no problem with that be done today. And I don't oppose the
> location, am
> fine with it.
> 
> Greetings
> Christoph

Ok. Can you throw in a request at 
https://sysadmin.kde.org/svnaccount/repo-request.php

I'll create it after projects.kde.org is back up.
-- 
Tom Albers
KDE Sysadmin