From kde-release-team Sun Jan 13 22:59:16 2008 From: "Tobias Gerschner" Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:59:16 +0000 To: kde-release-team Subject: Re: release-team Digest, Vol 13, Issue 28 Message-Id: X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kde-release-team&m=120026518918436 > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:44:41 +0100 > From: Olivier Goffart > Subject: Re: Move kwalletmanager? > To: KDE release coordination > Message-ID: <200801121244.47316.ogoffart@bepointbe.be> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > Le jeudi 10 janvier 2008, Riccardo Iaconelli a ?crit?: > > On Jan 10, 2008 7:50 PM, Allen Winter wrote: > > > On Thursday 10 January 2008 13:42:50 Urs Wolfer wrote: > > > > On Thursday 10 January 2008 19:29:39 Stephan Binner wrote: > > > > > On Thursday 10 January 2008 15:37:33 Allen Winter wrote: > > > > > > The kwallet seems like a critical app that should always be > > > > > > available > > > > > > > > > in our base system. > > > > > > > > > > More critical than kmix? :-) Wanting to say, kmix belongs there too > > > > > > imo. > > > > > > > Yes, I agree. Both kwalletmanager and kmix belong to kdebase. > > > > I think kdebase/runtime would be the correct place for these. > > > > > > I suggested kdebase/apps instead of kdebase/runtime because > > > moving anything into runtime causes a co-installability issue > > > that I'm sure one of the packagers will yell about. > > > > > > But either one of those locations is better than kdeutils IMO. > > > > Agreed, and personally I'm for kwallet in runtime/, it is a runtime > > dependency to me, > > while kmix can probably fit well into apps/. > > KMix is a muldimedia application, and so belongs to kdemultimedia. > > > > I almost think that ark, kcalc, kgpg, kfloppy, and sweeper > > > could go into kdebase as well. > > > > Agreed for ark (it's a shame that we don't have an unzipper in a basic > > installation), > > I disagree... > KDE is the set of all applications in every modules. And a basic installation > would include all main modules. > > I would say it is a shame to don't have a mail client in a basic installation. > > for me, ark can stay to kdeutils. > > > but not for the other ones, they belong to kdeutils IMHO (that's why the > > module exist). > > > IMO, we should not try to move things to kdebase, but maybe even the other > way around. > > Just my 2 cents. > Hi, For a start just to state the obvious: IMO there are many different definitions of kdebase used by everyone in that discussion. It would certainly be helpful to define the feature set the KDE Team wants to have in kdebase. Then take this feature set to decide what has to go into which module. For a start this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kdebase is actually good. Defining a concept quick and precisely. I like KDE for it's completeness. From a maintenance / packaging point of view KDE is the easiest desktop environment possible. With only a very few packages compiled you have this wonderful and powerful desktop environment that I would not want to miss. However I also think that there are already too many applications in kdebase by default. ( Just my 2 cents ) Kdebase should indeed provide you with a ( basic ) desktop. But further features should really be in the respective modules. So from my point of view neither mail nor volume really belong into kdebase . My personal idea about a kdebase would be a 'kdesktop' strictly bundling applications for the desktop with very limited concessions what else to include. I strongly concur with Oliver. But as mentioned above it certainly would be helpful to step back and think about the module structure that KDE has at the moment. And please don't bash me for saying that directly after the 4.0.0 release. regards -- Tobias Gerschner Yoper Linux - www.yoper.com Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must do. _______________________________________________ release-team mailing list release-team@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team