adding kwebkitpart to KDE SC

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Dimarts, 27 de març de 2012, a les 16:35:37, vau escriure:
> On Sunday 25 March 2012 23:40:28 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > El Diumenge, 25 de març de 2012, a les 23:29:14, David Faure va escriure:
> > > On Sunday 25 March 2012 08:14:05 Allen Winter wrote:
> > > > On Saturday 24 March 2012 8:16:28 PM David Faure wrote:
> > > > > Hello release team,
> > > > > 
> > > > > How do we get kwebkitpart (separate git module) released together
> > > > > with
> > > > > the
> > > > > rest of KDE SC (rather than "on its own schedule" as it was supposed
> > > > > to
> > > > > be, in extragear)?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Moving to kde-baseapps would do the job, but this requires replaying
> > > > > history, and will create trouble if we ever want to modularize it
> > > > > out
> > > > > again.
> > > > > 
> > > > > So is there a simple way to mark it as "part of KDE SC", so that
> > > > > it's
> > > > > released as a separate tarball, but together with the KDE SC
> > > > > releases?
> > > > 
> > > > Why not treat kwebkitpart exactly like we do konsole?
> > > > konsole lives in its own repo outside of kde-baseapps, but is
> > > > conceptually
> > > > part of kde-baseapps.
> > > 
> > > That would be perfect, indeed.
> > > 
> > > > Todo:
> > > > 1) In the projects.kde.org database, we would need to make kwebkitpart
> > > > a
> > > > child of kde-baseapps.
> > > 
> > > Who can do that? Do I need to file a sysadmin request, maybe?
> > 
> > Well, we'd need some discussion first, as if we really want that, should
> > we? At least agreement from the kde-baseapps maintainer? That according
> > to http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Release_Team is... noone. Great stuff
> > :-)
> > 
> > I'll go back to my cave now.
> 
> LOL.
> 
> Well, it was discussed between the kwebkitpart maintainer (Dawit) and the
> konqueror maintainer (me). If this was still the cvs or svn days, I would
> have imported kwebkitpart into the konqueror subdir, and it would be done
> already. With git I see value in keep the repo separate, hence the
> discussion here.
> 
> But I'm not sure which big debate you want around this -- it's the practical
> solution from a technical point of view, to prevent lots of ugly "ifdef
> KDE_VERSION..." when adding new integration stuff to all of kdelibs/kparts,
> khtml, kwebkitpart and konqueror. By releasing it all together, we don't
> have to always add ifdefs and fallbacks for older versions of kdelibs.

The technical point of view is not enough to guarantee something being part of 
the KDE SC, otherwise i could argue the same thing (don't want to have ugly 
KDE_VERSION around) for some obscure program only I would use.

Cheers,
  Albert