On Mon, Dec 30, 2019 at 3:03 AM Stephen Kelly <steve...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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).
I have now actioned the reversal. As this has cost a reasonable amount of time (and the full fallout of the reversal has yet to be felt, with the CI rebuild yet to come which I anticipate is going to require additional time on my part to sort out), i'm going to require that the Grantlee project on Github be transferred to KDE as part of the KF6 move (and this transfer will take place prior to any infrastructure being setup on our side) > > > 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. > > > > I hope my personal objections raised about it becoming an official KF module > > already now have not arrived with you as objection in general. > > > Not at all. I agree that the two libraries should be consistent with the > rest of the Frameworks. > > > > On the > > opposite, I agree with the ideas behind this move. I have just strict > > feeling > > about KF as a product itself when it comes to consumer as well as > > cross-module > > ontributor experience. > > So please be aware that I would be sad if you decided to have Grantlee go > > back > > to lonely cowboy mode :) > > > Only temporarily :). > > Thanks, > > Stephen. > > Regards, Ben
