The KDE Frameworks have been splitted

2013-12-18 Thread David Faure
Hi everyone. The frameworks branch of kdelibs is now closed forever. 57 repositories have been created instead (*). You can check out any of these individually using git clone kde:frameworkname, or, since you surely want all of them, you can use kdesrc-build with the kf5-qt5-build-include file

www/sites/www

2013-12-18 Thread Albert Astals Cid
SVN commit 1373291 by aacid: 4.12.0 is out \o/ CCMAIL: release-t...@kde.org CCMAIL: kde-packa...@kde.org CCMAIL: kde-core-devel@kde.org4.12.0 is out \o/ CCMAIL: release-t...@kde.org CCMAIL: kde-packa...@kde.org CCMAIL: kde-core-devel@kde.org4.12.0 is out \o/ CCMAIL: release-t...@kde.org

Re: The KDE Frameworks have been splitted

2013-12-18 Thread Martin Klapetek
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:53 PM, David Faure fa...@kde.org wrote: Hi everyone. The frameworks branch of kdelibs is now closed forever. 57 repositories have been created instead (*). You can check out any of these individually using git clone kde:frameworkname, or, since you surely want

frameworks build instructions wrong / won't work with kubuntu 14.04

2013-12-18 Thread Harald Sitter
Alohas, tldr: in ubuntu 14.04 automoc will (currently does) fall over dead with a qt5 built according to frameworks build instructions. what to do? According to Ubuntu getting cmake to pick up the correct build binaries (outside system paths) via environment variables is not a sane way to do it

Re: frameworks build instructions wrong / won't work with kubuntu 14.04

2013-12-18 Thread Sune Vuorela
On 2013-12-18, Harald Sitter sit...@kde.org wrote: Thoughts on this? What do we do about it? Tell ubuntu users to not use their distribution provided cmake because ubuntu decided to break cmake by doing quick hacks instead of figuring out how stuff works and then solve problems? /Sune

Re: Nepomuk in 4.13 and beyond

2013-12-18 Thread Jos Poortvliet
On Tuesday 17 December 2013 12:22:26 Todd wrote: On Dec 12, 2013 6:36 PM, Vishesh Handa m...@vhanda.in wrote: i’ll say it again here so that it is at least on record: i really disagree with renaming Nepomuk. call it Nepomuk 2 or whatever, but tossing aside name recognition and years

Re: Nepomuk in 4.13 and beyond

2013-12-18 Thread Mark Gaiser
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Jos Poortvliet jospoortvl...@gmail.com wrote: On Tuesday 17 December 2013 12:22:26 Todd wrote: On Dec 12, 2013 6:36 PM, Vishesh Handa m...@vhanda.in wrote: i’ll say it again here so that it is at least on record: i really disagree with renaming Nepomuk.