On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 11:05:35AM +0200, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 April 2006 02:18, Matt Rogers wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 April 2006 18:13, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 19 April 2006 01:05, Matt Rogers wrote:
> > > > isn't this what kdebase/workspace is for?
> > >
> > > No, kdebase/workspace contains lots of stuff which isn't needed for apps
> > > at all, like kicker, kdesktop, kwin, wallpapers, etc.
> >
> > k, then perhaps we should do as dirk suggested and move the stuff in your
> > proposal out to a module named kdeworkspace or similar. IMHO kdecore is not
> > a good module name due to the existance of kdelibs/kdecore.
> 
> Is kdelibs/kdecore meant to stay? Or will it dissolve in something like 
> kdecomponents or whatever was discussed at aKademy last year?

Right now it looks like it will stay. QtCore/QtGui obviously calls for kdecore/kdeui.
I think we're going towards kdecore/{network,framework,tools,etc.} and kdeui/{framework,widgets}.
(I would even do kdeui/{kio,kparts} to reduce the number of libs overall, but that's
for another thread)

> I came up with "kdecore" when thinking about module specific library modules 
> and having in mind the thread about "KDE Core Libraries" Thiago started. 
> "kdecore" would nicely go together with a "kdecorelibs" on the line of 
> "kdepim" and "kdepimlibs".

But a "core lib" is without gui, in Qt terms. And we can use this core/gui separation
in kdelibs too, since we do have quite a few kde daemons. 

So yes, I think "kdecore" is a confusing name, for kdebase/coreapps :)

David.