----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115602/#review50434 -----------------------------------------------------------
I understand Ivan point of view. Now I'm wondering about something: Are we sure the situation will be the same in the future for a 5 to 6 transition? I don't think we can be 100% sure and so we might want to start versioning to be ready for that and be consistent with other similar services. I wouldn't have a huge problem either way, just want to make sure we thought that through. - Kevin Ottens On Feb. 18, 2014, 9:50 p.m., Hrvoje Senjan wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115602/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 18, 2014, 9:50 p.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Frameworks and Ivan Čukić. > > > Repository: kactivities > > > Description > ------- > > ...so it can co-exists with kactivities4 in the same prefix > > > Diffs > ----- > > autotests/Process.cpp a7a0507 > src/lib/core/manager_p.cpp 57f60be > src/service/CMakeLists.txt 141e9b7 > src/service/files/kactivitymanagerd.desktop ce68a49 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/115602/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Both Plasma1 and Next ran fine with this patch and withouth > kactivitymanagerd(4) installed. Haven't tested the case when they are both > installed. > > > Thanks, > > Hrvoje Senjan > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel