On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 04:48:24PM +0200, Guillaume Laurent wrote:
> There is also the fact that the libs we depend on do not evolve quite a
> lot, so you don't have to upgrade them very often if at all. But for a new
> developer, having to download half a dozen libs from different places is a
> chore.

Agreed, but I believe only very few are actually _required_ and not yet
installed by the distribution.

> Yes, that is a problem. The suggested solution to do like Qt and disable
> compilation of things which are already installed is quite good.

But would prefer an approach which lets the user decide whether he/she wants
to compile it (possibly from kdesupport) or use a binary package. By no
means should be compile dependencies, not even by default even when the
requirements are not met. We recommend packages but provide convenience for
compile freaks.

> But it is KDE's job to be as easy to enter as possible. And kdesupport
> goes a very long way in this direction.

We're talking about people compiling from source. I agree that keeping
kdesupport as a matter of convenience (just like we do for qt-copy) for
those is nice, but it should be _very_ clear that kdesupport is that and
nothing more. It's not a requirement itself nor part of KDE.

Rob
-- 
Rob Kaper     | 'What? In riddles?' said Gandalf. 'No! For I was talking
cap@capsi.com | aloud to myself. A habit of the old: they choose the wisest
www.capsi.com | person present to speak to; the long explanations needed by
              | the young are wearying.' - "Lord of the Rings", JRR Tolkien