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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: admin/ subdir
From:       Stephan Kulow <coolo () kde ! org>
Date:       1999-12-29 20:45:21
[Download RAW message or body]

Kurt Granroth wrote:
> 
> Stephan Kulow wrote:
> [snip]
> > This is just about sources. You do not store the sources unless you're
> > a developer.
> 
> This is more about bandwith and FTP space.  I go to thinking about
> this when I wanted to supply the "before" and "after" example apps for
> a tutorial.  Each was nearly .5 M -- that means that if I wanted to
> package everything up in one big tarball, the user would have to
> download an extra 500K (already compressed) for nothing!
> 
> Plus, it wouldn't fit on my personal web site.  This isn't a huge deal
> for me since it's going somewhere else later anyway.. but this could
> be a big deal for somebody just starting out with KDE programming with
> their first app.
> 
> I know it's tempting to forget about all of the 14.4K and 28.8K and
> 56K modem users when you have a high speed connection,  but let me
> remind you that downloading and extra 1/2 Megabyte is still a
> significant download.
> 
> > The standard thing other projects to is to get rid of all automake
> > stuff in CVS and call automake --add-missing and libtoolize which
> > basicly create links to each needed file. But this in return
> > requires everyone to have the right version of each file and I like
> > that solution way less.
> 
> Well, we already require specific versions of the KDE libraries and
> support libraries.  Why not automake/autoconf?  I know that you have
> worlds more experience in this area then me, but I don't see the
> difference or what the problem is...

well, KDE libraries are libraries - while
autoconf/automake/libtool/yacc/lex, etc
are developer tools and requiring them for users is bad. And the other
point
is that if we require automake 1.4 and some other project requires
automake 1.4a,
you get in real trouble. This may work for KDE developers, but is
certainly bad
for anyone else who just wants to compile a single app.

I buy all your arguments, but I doubt they judge the bad side.

Greetings, Stephan

-- 
It said Windows 95 or better, so in theory Linux should run it
                                                GeorgeH on /.

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