Future frameworks releases

Mario Fux kde-ml at unormal.org
Mon Jun 8 20:29:16 UTC 2015

Am Montag, 08. Juni 2015, 17.21:56 schrieb Benjamin Reed:


> On 6/8/15 11:02 AM, Eric Hameleers wrote:
> > The only sane way forward is that every Frameworks release contains
> > all Frameworks tarballs, regardless of updates since the previous
> > public release. Every Framework should adhere to the overall version
> > number.
> Yeah, this proposal makes no sense to me.

Then please read the thread on kde-frameworks-devel as there is some sense in 
this proposal. We might decide against it in the end but to say that it 
doesn't make sense is just not valid.

> If you want to individually
> manage a library with an independent numbering scheme, then shouldn't it
> be a separate/external project?  The whole point of the "framework" is
> to provide a monolithic thing that has everything you need.

Either I don't get this sarcasm or you might be wrong.

"The whole point" of KDE Frameworks is that it is _modular_ and not monolithic 
as kdelibs was. As I see it the value of KDE Frameworks is the set of Qt 
Addons with a unique license and spreading over different platforms. A high 
quality set of additional features and libraries for Qt developers from 
developers with a lot of experience.

I don't think that the same version number of all released Frameworks as it 
currently stands is the strong point of KDE Frameworks.

But this addition of libraries to KDE Frameworks with a different version 
schema or semantics might add too much problems (althought I read some valid 
points in Christian's emails) and we might need to cancel this idea. But 
that's why we're dicussing it here and why David asked the quesion here and 
thus let's try to stay constructive (and this is not just to Benjamins email).


More information about the release-team mailing list