> On Sept. 20, 2016, 12:29 p.m., Marco Martin wrote: > > -1, would mean one code path/build config option to maintain for us
I would understand if Plasma did much more with Baloo. But I don't see that right now, it enables two rather isolated modules. While the config option can be revoked any time in the future should it become impossible to support, there are machines right now where the presence of Baloo does not make sense at all. - Andreas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128956/#review99320 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 20, 2016, 12:06 p.m., Andreas Sturmlechner wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128956/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 20, 2016, 12:06 p.m.) > > > Review request for Plasma. > > > Repository: plasma-workspace > > > Description > ------- > > https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/2016-September/037734.html > > Regardless of the current state of Baloo, it is not very deeply tied into > Plasma. Usage in plasma-workspace comes down to providing the baloo runner. > > > Diffs > ----- > > CMakeLists.txt 9da918358bd797b8fe00de646b6576ba22976d0e > runners/CMakeLists.txt 48cc3799f834a57031ae387a35f41859178fe317 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128956/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Several days of Plasma-5 without any issues. Usage of krunner without any > segfaults. > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Sturmlechner > >
