Re: Kirigami in Frameworks

2017-06-22 Thread Marco Martin 
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 6:22 PM, Jonathan Riddell  wrote:
> On 21 June 2017 at 15:00, Marco Martin  wrote:
>> As there were no replies for quite a while, i assume there are no
>> particular objections.
>>
>> so, how to proceed? what needs to be doe to do the actual move?
>
> Does it comply with the policies (as much as they are relevant for QML)?
> https://community.kde.org/Frameworks/Policies

yeah, it should for pretty much all rules

> Get David Faure to give his approval then see what the reponse to my
> "who is authorised to move repos around?" thead is.
> https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel=149806172721190=2



ok, waiting David's comment on it.

--
Marco Martin

Re: Kirigami in Frameworks

2017-06-21 Thread Jonathan Riddell 
On 21 June 2017 at 15:00, Marco Martin  wrote:
> As there were no replies for quite a while, i assume there are no
> particular objections.
>
> so, how to proceed? what needs to be doe to do the actual move?

Does it comply with the policies (as much as they are relevant for QML)?
https://community.kde.org/Frameworks/Policies

Get David Faure to give his approval then see what the reponse to my
"who is authorised to move repos around?" thead is.
https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel=149806172721190=2

Jonathan

Re: Kirigami in Frameworks

2017-06-21 Thread Marco Martin 
As there were no replies for quite a while, i assume there are no
particular objections.

so, how to proceed? what needs to be doe to do the actual move?

On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Marco Martin  wrote:
> Hi all,
> The Kirigami component set always was targeted to be eventually released as a
> framework, ideally tier 1. since a framework must depend at most from 2 Qt
> releases before the current one, it couldn't be released there yet.
> Now that Qt 5.9 is released, i would like to propose to move Kirigami in
> frameworks, to be relased in the main release cycle, and stop standalone
> releases from extragear.
>
> It strictly depends just from Qt stuff, so should be tier 1 (at runtime it can
> use optional styles that use features from Plasma, tough not having plasma
> installed doesn't touch its functionality in any part, if this ends up being a
> problem, i can move that style into plasma-integration)
>
> --
> Marco Martin