On Saturday 04 March 2006 11:33, Olivier Goffart wrote:
> Le Vendredi 3 Mars 2006 23:31, Gary Greene a écrit :
> > The main reason for splitting them into different libraries is that then
> > a Qt app developer who wants to use a feature isn't tied to the extra
> > stuff in kdelibs, since it's pure qt and c++ in these "foundation"
> > libraries. Yes, there may rise a case where we want to extend a class
> > that has dependencies on both core and foundation, but that just means
> > that we have to engineer and plan better is all. I for one will be happy
> > to see this split done as apps then can be purely qt if they wish and
> > take advantage of some of the foundation classes without pulling in all
> > of kdelibs, thus keepingthe footprint of an app down.
>
> But theses class still may be placed in the normal kdelibs library.
>
> If the Qt application author want to reuse the KFoo class, he just need to
> copy kfoo.{cpp,h} into his own application. No matter in what library the
> class is
>
> We probably just need to have a document that say which class doesn't
> depends of others KDE code too much.

Putting it in a special placeforces to remind developers to take care about 
that independency. Otherwise it is too easy to forget and to create a 
dependency that is not wanted.

Have a nice day!