[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: what packages do we want distros to ship ?
From:       Matt Rogers <mattr () kde ! org>
Date:       2008-12-25 19:19:29
Message-ID: 200812251319.30133.mattr () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Thursday 25 December 2008 09:18:43 am Dan Meltzer wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 6:24 AM, Mark Kretschmann <kretschmann@kde.org> 
wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 9:46 AM, Alexander Neundorf <neundorf@kde.org> 
wrote:
> >> since I'm doing the build stuff I'm getting in contact with packagers
> >> from distributions and their wishes.
> >> One thing which I don't know what the current state is, is what type of
> >> KDE packages do we want distributions to ship ?
> >> We have the "modules" kdelibs, kdebase, kdepim etc. These are quite
> >> corse-grained.
> >> E.g. Slackware ships them that way, so you get  a package kdebase.tar.gz
> >> etc.#
> >>
> >> E.g. Gentoo is on the other end, they modify the buildsystem so that
> >> they can ship everything as a single package. E.g they'd like to have a
> >> separate package for each library in kdebase/workspace/.
> >>
> >> Now, we could say, it's up to them, we don't care.
> >> But that wouldn't be good. It would be better if we support what we want
> >> them to ship, so they have to do less (or no) modifications and we know
> >> what will be shipped to our users.
> >> Also making more fine-grained packages than whole-module-one-package can
> >> be made easier for them if we consider this when writing the
> >> CMakeLists.txt. (e.g. by keeping in mind that CMAKE_SOURCE_DIR and
> >> CMAKE_BINARY_DIR are different when building a whole module instead of
> >> independent, by making configure tests local to the application, etc.).
> >>
> >> So, what do we expect what will be shipped ?
> >>
> >> My guess is that it's somewhere in between, e.g. whole kdelibs, whole
> >> kdepimlibs, whole kdebase/workspace libs, but separate e.g. kontact,
> >> kate, kwin, kmail etc.
> >
> > With Amarok 2 we've made it so that you can (in fact you must!) build
> > it from the extragear/multimedia/amarok directory, as opposed to
> > building it from the extragear/multimedia directory.
>
> Not must, can.
>
> Amarok still builds from multimedia/
>

thank you for the clarification, since I build all of extragear/multimedia. :)

> > We figured that extragear applications are really separate entities
> > and most people aren't interested in building the whole shebang, when
> > they really just want one specific app.
> >
> > --
> > Mark Kretschmann
> > Amarok Developer
> > www.kde.org - amarok.kde.org

-- 
Matt
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]