git migration, next steps

[Robby Workman]

On Fri, 3 Jun 2011, Raphael Kubo da Costa wrote:

> Eric Hameleers <alien at slackware.com> writes:
>
>> If you want to give people a feeling of unity (pun intended) when
>> running KDE it should not be given to packagers as a shambles of small
>> un-coordinated source tarballs.
>
> I'd appreciate it if people interested in the monolithic tarballs could
> summarize their concerns so that it is easier to understand their
> reasons.
>
> So far, I can see these:
>
>  * Adding new packages (SRPMs or whatever) is slow in some distros;
>  * Fear that new tarballs will be released without proper instructions
>    or not following any criteria, so that creating packages and
>    following the dependencies gets harder.


One of them has already (sorta) happened, though I don't recall the part
involved.  Suppose several components depend on a particular library,
e.g. libsomething, and the libsomething dev team releases a new version
with some cool new feature and an API change.  Some of the components
see that cool new feature and start depending on the new API, while 
others don't.  KDE SC -next includes some of each of those components.
Now, which one should packagers ship?

As I wrote this, my memory jogged a bit, and I seem to recall that
shared-desktop-ontologies was the involved bit mentioned earlier...

-RW