git migration, next steps

Jeremy Whiting jpwhiting at
Fri Jun 3 18:01:38 CEST 2011

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Eric Hameleers <alien at> wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Jeremy Whiting wrote:
>  Dirk, all,
>> As you may or may not know kdeaccessibility and kdeutils are ready to
>> migrate to git (when the freeze is over, don't worry).  And we'd like to
>> know what the feeling is about the best time to migrate to minimize
>> packaging/releasing stresses.  We'd also like to know what
>> packagers/release-team think of the split repos already done in kde-edu,
>> etc. Should we provide artificial monolithic tarballs?
>> thanks,
>> Jeremy Whiting
> Hi Jeremy
> Thanks for asking this, really appreciated.

It needs discussing, so I brought it up.

> I would feel very relieved if the old monolithic tarballs would stay as a
> download option.  Even if the release team maintains a series of scripts
> that makes a controlled checkout of monolithic tarballs possible for
> packagers, that would be an acceptible solution.

As a developer preferring split git repos I'm not against this solution,
assuming dirk wants to go for this.  My plan for kdeaccessibility is to make
one simple CMakeLists.txt that can be used with a tarball of each
application beneath it to simply create what exists in svn now.

> I expressed my thoughts on the split of kdeedu in an earlier post and
> coincidentally I fired up this discussion on my blog and the SLackware forum
> a few hours ago... Slackware will have to consider dropping KDE if we are
> confronted with source fragmentation.  We are a small team and can not
> accept the added burden of maintaining a fragmented KDE based desktop
> environment.  Fragmenting the source tarballs may be only one step but
> seeing what happens in GNOME land, with Redhat employees forcibly pushing
> people into directions they do not want to be taken, I would welcome it if
> KDE would remain the sane, independent desktop enviroment, or even Software
> Collection, that I have come to love.

I was involved with the kdeedu split and I agree it wasn't very well done.
Part of that was bad assumptions on my part, but I think we've learned from
the mistakes made there.  I also don't see how smaller tarballs == more
burden, but I've never been a packager.  I don't see how it creates
something different than the "sane, independent desktop environment" either,
could you explain that a bit?


> Cheers, Eric
> - -- Eric Hameleers <alien at>
> Jabber: alien at
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: For info see
> iEYEARECAAYFAk3o+cAACgkQXlaqr6dcvaC6dgCfeQLtEetvS4t/MEZmIFkrgsEg
> naIAn12z4bp/1EjO00dKiL/HkVizoRVR
> =3XmU
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the release-team mailing list