On 2/22/07, Aaron J. Seigo <aseigo@kde.org> wrote:
> On February 22, 2007, Richard Moore wrote:
> > I think the issue here is more that non-KDE applications that use
> > these tools to integrate into KDE should be able to depend on them to
> > be present.
>
> that's why they are in kdebase, and not in kdebase/apps or kdebase/workspace.
>
> perhaps "tools" is a better word than "utils" here then; "utils" seems to
> imply "miscelaneous crud" which isn't true. nor was that my intention with
> this grouping.
>
> keeping runtime/ to mean "those applications which form the runtime
> requirements of KDE applications" seems to be a good separate goal to me for
> reasons i've already stated.
>
> would runtime/ and tools/ be more palatable, or is that just arranging deck
> chairs?

I think it's rearranging deck chairs. How about looking at it another way:

Anything kdebase will be in one of these groups:

a) Present on all platforms for KDE applications to operate
b) Present to allow non-KDE apps for a particular platform to integrate
c) Part of the KDE desktop environement itself

a == apps
b == ??
c == workspace

Is this a better way of looking at things?

Rich.