On 27 September 2015 at 03:36, Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> wrote: > El Dissabte, 26 de setembre de 2015, a les 16:27:22, Sune Vuorela va escriure: >> On 2015-09-26, Alexander Potashev <aspotas...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > 1. Many people prefer a "KF5" prefix, e.g. libKF5Screen.so). >> > 2. Another way of naming is a -qt5 suffix, e.g. libmarblewidget-qt5.so. >> > 3. (probably some others?) >> > >> > Friedrikh said in [1] that using a KF5 prefix for all libraries will >> > "blur the hint by the name if something is part of KF5 or not". >> > >> > Any thoughts? I believe we can have guidelines for library names. >> >> I do think that having things named KF5 that aren't actual frameworks is >> bad for several reasons. >> >> 1) It blurs what's a framework >> 2) We promise ABI and API compatibility for frameworks, but not for >> other things >> 3) Moving something from "not a KDE Framework" to "KDE Framework" gives >> a last chance for fixing up abi/api. >> >> so. foo-qt5 is fine for a qt5 version of foo. > > I agree, the problem is that there's few exceptions to copy from, so that's > the exact reason libkdegames has that KF5 thing in the name, the guy that did > the port just copied what the frmeworks do. > > So anyone up for write what "a library that is not frameworks should do to be > nice in the KDE land"?
We could kill two birds with one stone here, creating a new KDE module just for libraries (say, KDE Companion Libraries or something) and put everything in the KC5 (or whatever we decide) namespace. I'm all for just putting everything in KDE Support, using the KS5 namespace and removing the tier0 restriction from Support. -- Boudhayan _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
