On 30/12/2019 08:55, Dominik Haumann wrote:
Hi,
Stephen Kelly <steve...@gmail.com <mailto:steve...@gmail.com>> schrieb
am So., 29. Dez. 2019, 15:03:
On 28/12/2019 23:30, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Why are you proposing to do a step back instead to the old
state, which
> everyone including you considered not that satisfying?
Because it's a temporary situation. We still have a way forward in
KF6
(which will open in a few months).
Generally, getting Grantlee into KF5 now also establishes the wrong
precedent. Grantlee should be split into two repos each with a tier 1
library (KF6::TextDocument and KF6::TextTemplate). The two are
independent and have nothing to do with each other aside from
authorship. That seems to be something you were objecting to, so I
want
to make sure that's something addressed on its own. The two KF6
libraries will then follow the KF6 naming conventions etc.
With my KTextEditor hat on: KF6:TextDocument implies somehow a link to
QTextDocument or KF6:TextEditor, which both is incorrect, right?
QTextDocument is exactly what it's about, which makes the name
KF6::TextDocument fully appropriate and correct.
Before starting this work, let's clarify whether we can find a more
unique name (like KF6:GrantleeTextDocument).
The name I suggest is already correct.
Since I haven't used Grantlee yet, I sm likely not the best person to
find a better name ;)
Remember, Grantlee is a set of Frameworks (*Just like KF5/6*) which
happens to contain just TWO independent libraries.
Thanks,
Stephen.
