On Sunday, August 16, 2015 11:21:00 PM David Faure wrote: > On Sunday 16 August 2015 13:51:29 Michael Pyne wrote: > > There's no reason even with our current build metadata that we'd *have* to > > have project hierarchies, as long as each underlying git repository name > > remains unique. It might even make things easier since there would be no > > way > > for a sub-path in our project hierarchy (such as kde/kdelibs/kactivities) > > to > > mask a git repository name (kdelibs in this case). > > Ben and I discussed it today and we think there is usefulness in one level of > subtree within the > Applications product, to be able to keep the 'groups' like kdegraphics, > kdemultimedia etc. which > are useful in order to have a maintainer per 'group' (as reinforced by the > release team recently). > This is indeed what we use to call "modules", no? And what was earlier in this thread referred to as "Products" is what we used to call "Components" Only in Applications I suppose, but nevertheless this is coming back around to what we had. which I liked.
> But yes, only one level, and AFAICS only useful in Applications. > kactivities (to pick your example) would be "at the root of" Frameworks, no > sub-path needed. > > _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
