Well, NetworkManagerQt and ModemManagerQt are Qt only libraries since the beginning. They are not meant to depend on any KDE libraries as I said, so they are not meant to be merged to KF5. I looked the branches frameworks and you basically did just that (make them depend on KF5). I think we should keep them Qt only and not depend on KF5, the opposite is ok though.
Lamarque V. Souza KDE's Network Management maintainer http://planetkde.org/pt-br On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Jan Grulich <jgrul...@redhat.com> wrote: > On Thursday 03 of April 2014 12:52 Lamarque Souza wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > 1) I do not see a real need to rename (again) ModemManagerQt and > > NetworkManagerQt. They are named that way to indicate they depend only on > > Qt and not on any library created by KDE, so they are tier1 since the > > beginning. I am not familiar with KF5's library naming conventions but I > > would like to keep the names as they are. > > It's just maybe a little bit strange having KF5 prefix and Qt suffix, but > it's > fine with me. > > > > > 2) At least for now we can sync the release schedule of NMQt 0.9.10 with > > KF5's even if NMQt is not officially part of KF5 yet. Besides, the > biggest > > user of NMQt is Plasma NM. ModemManagerQt is used by both Plasma NM and > KDE > > Telepathy. Is KDE Telepathy already ported to KF5? If porting Plasma NM > to > > KF5 (and Plasma 2) is going to take long there will be no real testing > > programs for the KF5 versions of NMQt and MMQt, so no big pressure to > > release them. I also think the first KF5 compatible release of NMQt > should > > be compatible with the first KF5 release of Plasma NM. > > > > KDE Telepathy uses the old version of ModemManagerQt, so Plasma NM is the > only > one using it actually. I guess the only thing we need is at least some > testing > tarballs when Plasma Next is finally out. > > > 3) I will take a look at them when I get home. I cannot access KDE's git > > repos from my work (no ssh/irc/smtp connections are allowed from here, > just > > https). > > > > I plan to do changes in Plasma NM's wpa2 enterprise handling in the near > > future. I can help porting it to KF5 too. Is there any big reason > (besides > > the usual "lack of time") for not porting Plasma NM to KF5 now? > > > > Plasma NM is already ported to KF5/Plasma2 and it is working perfectly, > except > a few things that needs to be polished or finished. I meant it is not > ported to > my latest changes in libmm-qt/libnm-qt (framework branches). > > Jan > > > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Jan Grulich <jgrul...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I would like to make libmm-qt and libnm-qt as KDE frameworks, they are > > > based > > > only on Qt, so they could be in Tier 1. I've already started (you can > see > > > framework branches) and I would like to ask to a few questions. > > > > > > 1) How to name them? Until now we named them ModemManagerQt and > > > NetworkManagerQt, but if we add KF5 prefix, it would be maybe better to > > > name it > > > only ModemManager/NetworkManager (with KF5 prefix), but there is a > > > problem, if > > > you will use it in the source code. Imagine including > > > <NetworkManager/WirelessDevice>, it will work, but it kinda conflicts > with > > > NetworkManager headers and it's not clear which one is used, whether > > > KF5::NetworkManager or NetworkManager. > > > > > > 2) When to release them? We are not probably ready to be released with > the > > > first wave of KDE frameworks and it's probably too late. I don't know > how > > > often > > > you plan to make releases, but at least for libnm-qt I would like to > have > > > support for NetworkManager 0.9.10, which should be probably released > soon > > > (or > > > not) and it's also possible we will change something during porting > > > plasma-nm > > > to KF5/Plasma2 to our needs or make the API better. > > > > > > 3) If you can take a look at it and tell what is wrong or necessary to > > > change. > > > I just took inspiration from some Tier1 frameworks and changed it > > > accordingly. > > > > > > NOTE: plasma-nm is not ported to use framework branches, it is still > using > > > master branches and I don't want to port it yet. > > > > > > Thanks a lot. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Jan > > > > > > -- > > > Jan Grulich > > > Red Hat Czech, s.r.o > > > jgrul...@redhat.com > > -- > Jan Grulich > Red Hat Czech, s.r.o > jgrul...@redhat.com >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel