Hi,
for frameworks, it is all very nice and automatic, the version in the
CMakeLists.txt get auto-updated on each KF 5.x release.
It seems to me, for the "applications" collection, something similar might make
sense.
E.g. I missed to ever update the Kate version since 5.0 and other application
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> for frameworks, it is all very nice and automatic, the version in the
> CMakeLists.txt get auto-updated on each KF 5.x release.
>
> It seems to me, for the "applications" collection, something similar might
> make sense.
>
> E.g
On Mon, June 8, 2015 11:32 pm, Aleix Pol wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Christoph Cullmann
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> for frameworks, it is all very nice and automatic, the version in the
>> CMakeLists.txt get auto-updated on each KF 5.x release.
>>
>> It seems to me, for the "applications" c
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:35 AM, David Jarvie wrote:
>
> There has been debate about this for frameworks, and there is an argument
> there (not agreed by everybody) for making all frameworks have the same
> version, since framework libraries are dependencies for other software.
>
> The same argum
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:35 AM, David Jarvie wrote:
>
> >
> > There has been debate about this for frameworks, and there is an argument
> > there (not agreed by everybody) for making all frameworks have the same
> > version, since framework libraries are dependencies for other software.
> >
>
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Christoph Cullmann wrote:
>> Personally I prefer having the application versions matching the release
>> version
>> (ie. 15.04.x) so that there is no additional versions mapping required ("is
>> version 3.4
>> part of KDE Applications 15.04 or 15.08 or..?").
>>
>>
El Dilluns, 8 de juny de 2015, a les 20:25:19, Christoph Cullmann va escriure:
> Hi,
>
> for frameworks, it is all very nice and automatic, the version in the
> CMakeLists.txt get auto-updated on each KF 5.x release.
>
> It seems to me, for the "applications" collection, something similar might
>
As the KDE Apps release is getting near, is this being considered/deployed?
Should we be setting some CMake variables?
Cheers
--
Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Martin Klapetek
wrote:
> As the KDE Apps release is getting near, is this being considered/deployed?
> Should we be setting some CMake variables?
>
> Cheers
> --
> Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
Yes, that's why Albert was asking for a blog/wiki documentation.
Al
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Aleix Pol wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Martin Klapetek
> wrote:
> > As the KDE Apps release is getting near, is this being
> considered/deployed?
> > Should we be setting some CMake variables?
> >
> > Cheers
> > --
> > Martin Klapetek | KDE Developer
Hi, something like that?
https://userbase.kde.org/KDE_Applications_Versioning
Where to move it? And is the script in place now?
Greetings
Christoph
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 1:24 PM, Aleix Pol wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Martin Klapetek
> > wro
El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 15:52:44, Christoph Cullmann va
escriure:
> Hi, something like that?
>
> https://userbase.kde.org/KDE_Applications_Versioning
I'd like to make it clearer that this is optional and maybe also an example
that only uses KDE_APPLICATIONS_VERSION_MICRO
Also
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
> El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 15:52:44, Christoph Cullmann va
> escriure:
> > Hi, something like that?
> >
> > https://userbase.kde.org/KDE_Applications_Versioning
>
> I'd like to make it clearer that this is optional and maybe also an example
> that
El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 16:59:13, Christoph Cullmann va
escriure:
> - Ursprüngliche Mail -
>
> > El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 15:52:44, Christoph Cullmann va
> >
> > escriure:
> > > Hi, something like that?
> > >
> > > https://userbase.kde.org/KDE_Applicatio
- Ursprüngliche Mail -
> El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 16:59:13, Christoph Cullmann va
> escriure:
> > - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> >
> > > El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 15:52:44, Christoph Cullmann va
> > >
> > > escriure:
> > > > Hi, something like that?
> >
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 8:51 AM, Christoph Cullmann wrote:
>
>
> - Ursprüngliche Mail -
>> El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 16:59:13, Christoph Cullmann va
>> escriure:
>> > - Ursprüngliche Mail -
>> >
>> > > El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 15:52:44, Christoph Cull
El Diumenge, 12 de juliol de 2015, a les 22:51:11, Christoph Cullmann va
escriure:
> - Ursprüngliche Mail -
>
> > El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 2015, a les 16:59:13, Christoph Cullmann va
> >
> > escriure:
> > > - Ursprüngliche Mail -
> > >
> > > > El Dissabte, 11 de juliol de 20
Since this hasn't been finalized I didn't include it in my email to kde-cvs-
announce about the creation of the 15.08 branches for the KDE Applications
modules.
Cheers,
Albert
El Dimarts, 14 de juliol de 2015, a les 07:08:57, Andreas Cord-Landwehr va
escriure:
> On Monday 13 July 2015 23:14:1
Hi,
> Since this hasn't been finalized I didn't include it in my email to kde-cvs-
> announce about the creation of the 15.08 branches for the KDE Applications
> modules.
>
> Cheers,
> Albert
>
> El Dimarts, 14 de juliol de 2015, a les 07:08:57, Andreas Cord-Landwehr va
> escriure:
> > On Mond
El Dilluns, 20 de juliol de 2015, a les 09:42:40, Andreas Cord-Landwehr va
escriure:
> On Tuesday 14 July 2015 07:08:57 Andreas Cord-Landwehr wrote:
> > If it is OK this way, I can add it later today to the wiki page.
>
> Hi, since I did not hear any oppositions, I just added the paragraph to the
Hi,
blog done, hope is ok that way, it should be clear enough that this is
optional, I hope.
http://kate-editor.org/2015/07/26/kde-applications-versioning/
I guess I will take a look in the next days and patch some applications for
which the version
got never touched since their KF5 port
On Monday 13 July 2015 23:14:17 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> I did a few tweaks, i still feel it seems this is "the official way" other
> than an "optional way" of defining the version but maybe that's just me.
Hi, I have the same feeling as Albert that the current text is not clear
enough that bo
On Tuesday 14 July 2015 07:08:57 Andreas Cord-Landwehr wrote:
> If it is OK this way, I can add it later today to the wiki page.
Hi, since I did not hear any oppositions, I just added the paragraph to the
wiki page draft.
Cheers,
Andreas
23 matches
Mail list logo
