KDE Applications 17.04.0 packages available for packagers

[Friedrich W. H. Kossebau]

Hi,

Am Montag, 17. April 2017, 10:39:55 CEST schrieb Heinz Wiesinger:
> On Monday, 17 April 2017 10:01:29 CEST Harald Sitter wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Eric Hameleers <alien at slackware.com> 
wrote:
> > > On Fri, 14 Apr 2017, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > >> At the usual location.
> > >> 
> > >> Haven't had time to compile yet, will start now.
> > >> 
> > >> REVISIONS_AND_HASHES file at https://paste.kde.org/ptskor7sa
> > >> 
> > >> Public release next week thursday.
> > >> 
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> 
> > >>  Albert
> > > 
> > > After compiling marble, I end up with these library files and links:
> > > 
> > > $ ll /usr/lib64/libmarblewidget-qt5.so*
> > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      25 Apr 16 13:07
> > > /usr/lib64/libmarblewidget-qt5.so -> libmarblewidget-qt5.so.27*
> > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 7854768 Apr 16 12:56
> > > /usr/lib64/libmarblewidget-qt5.so.0.26.20*
> > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root      30 Apr 16 13:07
> > > /usr/lib64/libmarblewidget-qt5.so.27 -> libmarblewidget-qt5.so.0.26.20*
> > > 
> > > Why the ".so.27"? As a result, digikam (compiled against marble 16.12.3)
> > > complains with "error while loading shared libraries:
> > > libmarblewidget-qt5.so.26"
> > > 
> > > Looking at the library name "libmarblewidget-qt5.so.0.26.20" I would
> > > expect
> > > the symlink to end on 26, instead of 27.
> > 
> > marble does not maintain their ABIs as such they increase their
> > soversions every feature release.
> 
> That's fine, that's not the problem though. The problem is that version
> numbers don't match. Checking git I think a commit bumping marble to a
> stable version (0.27.0 instead of 0.26.20, which marks a development
> version) is missing.
> 
> CC'ing Friedrich who did the bump last time for Applications 16.12. Maybe he
> can clarify.

I am currently inactive in Marble development, also have not tracked 17.04 
preparations.

Passing on to official Marble maintainers :)
Perhaps this issue is another indication that Marble should switch to an 
independent release cycle, given the lack of resources to properly prepare KDE 
Application releases? Given Marble Maps app (the mobil navigation app) 
releases already on an own cycle, perhaps the rest of Marble should follow 
there, as it also is all the same repo... IMHO. But not my call.

Cheers
Friedrich