On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:40:40PM +0100, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
This is what the horizontal experts do all the time, be it translations, or
buildsystem, etc.
Sure, but how many horizontal experts are there vs. just regular hackers
that want to fix whatever library they're using? And don't
On Saturday 09 February 2013, Martin Sandsmark wrote:
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:39:29PM +0100, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
IMO this is very much not a black-and-white situation.
It is not leave everything in one huge blob as it is now vs. put every
tiny library in its separate repository,
On Saturday 09 February 2013, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
On Saturday 09 February 2013, Martin Sandsmark wrote:
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 05:39:29PM +0100, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
IMO this is very much not a black-and-white situation.
It is not leave everything in one huge blob as it is now
On Fri, 8 Feb 2013 08:58:57 +0100, Frank Reininghaus wrote:
Hi Patrick,
2013/2/8 Patrick Spendrin:
Am 07.02.2013 23:32, schrieb Frank Reininghaus:
...
Since I am reading this thread by chance, I might as well reply.
One of the reasons of splitting kdelibs into separate repositories
is to
Hi,
On Feb 8, 2013, at 02:07, Patrick Spendrin ps...@gmx.de wrote:
One of the reasons of splitting kdelibs into separate repositories is to
simplify the usage of single modules.
From the perspective of a full *KDE* desktop, there is no problem in
building using all of kdelibs, since each
On 2013-02-08, Mirko Boehm mi...@kde.org wrote:
As Frank said: I haven't seen any convincing argument yet why multiple
repositories are better.
+1.
There are several things here intermixed
1) is the release tarball layout
2) is the way the software is built
3) is the repository layout
all
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 12:13:31PM +0100, Mirko Boehm wrote:
I actually fail to see how splitting the libraries will make things
simpler. It does make handling the repositories harder, especially for
newcomers who have to learn a whole new (and unintuitive) side of git, as
Kevin said.
Well,
Hi,
On Feb 8, 2013, at 12:46, Sune Vuorela nos...@vuorela.dk wrote:
There are several things here intermixed
1) is the release tarball layout
2) is the way the software is built
3) is the repository layout
all of them is different things with different arguments for and
against.
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 01:10:20PM +0100, Mirko Boehm wrote:
I am mostly arguing that to achieve 1) and 2), we do not have to have 3), a
multi-repository structure. It can all be achieved by email.
Still leaves the fact that kdelibs currently is 188MB (and it is not going to
shrink) which is
On Friday 08 February 2013, Martin Sandsmark wrote:
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 01:10:20PM +0100, Mirko Boehm wrote:
I am mostly arguing that to achieve 1) and 2), we do not have to have 3),
a multi-repository structure. It can all be achieved by email.
Still leaves the fact that kdelibs
On Friday 08 February 2013, Martin Sandsmark wrote:
...
I honestly don't think most people are going to hack on many of the various
frameworks at the same time (and for those who plan to do that, the
procedure is pretty clearly documented and straight-forward).
This is what the horizontal
On Thursday 07 February 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote:
On Thursday 7 February 2013 16:09:51 Frank Reininghaus wrote:
Is there anything obvious that I'm overlooking? One could argue that
separate repositories make it easier for non-KDE people to contribute
to one particular framework.
It's not
On Thursday 07 February 2013 21:11:02 Alexander Neundorf wrote:
On Thursday 07 February 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote:
On Thursday 7 February 2013 16:09:51 Frank Reininghaus wrote:
Is there anything obvious that I'm overlooking? One could argue that
separate repositories make it easier for
Hi,
2013/2/7 Kevin Ottens:
On Thursday 7 February 2013 16:09:51 Frank Reininghaus wrote:
Is there anything obvious that I'm overlooking? One could argue that
separate repositories make it easier for non-KDE people to contribute
to one particular framework.
It's not only contributing but
Am 07.02.2013 23:32, schrieb Frank Reininghaus:
...
Since I am reading this thread by chance, I might as well reply.
One of the reasons of splitting kdelibs into separate repositories is to
simplify the usage of single modules.
From the perspective of a full *KDE* desktop, there is no problem in
On Thursday 7 February 2013 23:32:12 Frank Reininghaus wrote:
If, however, a user decides to clone the repository and build from
source or, even better, start contributing, I seriously doubt that
cloning one frameworks repository and then cd'ing to the interesting
framework would be perceived
Hi Patrick,
2013/2/8 Patrick Spendrin:
Am 07.02.2013 23:32, schrieb Frank Reininghaus:
...
Since I am reading this thread by chance, I might as well reply.
One of the reasons of splitting kdelibs into separate repositories is to
simplify the usage of single modules.
From the perspective
On Wed, 6 Feb 2013 19:57:09 +0100, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
Hi,
at Kevin's talk about KDE frameworks at FOSDEM last weekend, one guy
from the
audience asked why he should not use all KDE libs if he decides to
use one
already...
This got me thinking.
Obviously, dragging in everything is what
18 matches
Mail list logo
