From kde-core-devel Thu May 04 01:42:50 2006 From: Matt Rogers Date: Thu, 04 May 2006 01:42:50 +0000 To: kde-core-devel Subject: Re: Proposal: New module "kdepimlibs" Message-Id: <200605032042.50980.mattr () kde ! org> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-core-devel&m=114670688609997 k, a bit later than i planned, but better late than never, right? On Wednesday 19 April 2006 03:51, Cornelius Schumacher wrote: > On Wednesday 19 April 2006 02:08, Matt Rogers wrote: > > Is the ability to deviate from kdelibs policies and release schedules > > really that important? I could see this causing all kinds of problems, > > but I am a bit paranoid nowadays. :) > > It's not the primary motivation for the proposal. But as the topic of > releasing modules separately regularly comes up I mentioned it because we > would be better prepared to handle it with the better modularization. I > personally would prefer to not make use of this option. > > > I'm not sure that all of this belongs outside of kdepim. Are > > libkmime,libkholidays, and libsyndication already used outside of kdepim, > > or are we just putting them some other place so that other projects can > > use them? > > libsyndication is a rewrite of a library which was forked from the > kdenetwork module (where it's used by knewsticker) and duplicated in > kdepim. It certainly would clean things up to only have one shared library > for this specific functionality. > I wasn't aware of that. Definately nice to have it some place central then > libkmime is a border case. Having decent access to email objects is > something which could well be useful for lots of applications. Search > applications are one example. > hmm, there's an app that i'm considering writing that would use kmime, so i think this would indeed be useful for lots of apps. > libkholidays would provide all applications handling dates with the option > to know about holidays. We are for example still missing the display of > holidays in the calendar which is part of the clock applet. That's a pity, > because it's a feature which would be easy to implement. The only reason > it's not there yet is the problem of dependencies. > > > What happened to the rule that two apps had to be using a class (or > > set of classes) before a move to kdelibs could even be considered? > > By having something like kdepimlibs it would be easier to follow these kind > of rules because kdelibs would not be the only way to share libraries > between modules, but there would be an intermediate step. > > > I think all the functionality of libemailfunctions can and should be > > moved back into the kdelibs as well. > > For the specific case of libemailfunctions I'm fine with every solution > where it can be folded back in an existing library. Ok, so I'm totally convinced this is a good idea now. When's it going to happen and do I need to do something to help move it along? I've not seen any objections. Thanks -- Matt