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

List:       kde-release-team
Subject:    Re: Re: Release Script (KF5)
From:       Martin =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Gr=E4=DFlin?= <mgraesslin () kde ! org>
Date:       2012-07-12 18:25:03
Message-ID: 1377326.VB3tcCkug5 () martin-desktop
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Thursday 12 July 2012 13:01:47 Rex Dieter wrote:
> On 07/12/2012 12:43 PM, Martin Gräßlin wrote:
> >> Now, I'd have a much lesser concern if modules that are part of the 'kde
> >> development platform' at least are never skipped.
> > 
> > Could you explain why?
> 
> So, right now I can do a very simple runtime dependency for kde apps:
> 
> KDE_DEV_VERSION=$(kde4-config --kde-version | cut -d' ' -f1)
> 
> Requires: kde-runtime >= $KDE_DEV_VERSION
My understanding is that there won't be a kde-runtime once there is 
frameworks.

But apart from that: could we start dreaming? Dreaming of a KDE where every 
application clearly defines what dependencies it has and exactly in a way that 
packagers can set up the dependencies in an automatic and correct way? Can we 
consider going forward with leaving all hacks behind us and not stop the 
fixing with the hacks being the reasons?

For me as a developer it would be much nicer if I could say that my app 
requires only version 5.x of framework bar and 5.y of framework foobar. And 
not having a generic dependency set by the packager to 5.z.

Would that change your point of view? Would it still be more difficult or in 
fact easier?

Kind Regards
Martin Gräßlin
["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
release-team mailing list
release-team@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team


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