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

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: Fine-grain KOffice source tree
From:       Boudewijn Rempt <boud () valdyas ! org>
Date:       2010-08-24 13:18:50
Message-ID: 201008241518.50246.boud () valdyas ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tuesday 24 August 2010, LukasT.dev@gmail.com wrote:

> o kofficelibs
> o koffice (-krita -karbon +braindump)
> o kathelier (+krita +karbon)
> o kofficeplugins (all that 
> BUILD_SOMETIMES_I_REALLY_DONT_KNOW_WHAT_DOES_THIS_PLUGIN in ccmake 
> configuration)
> 
> And I really like it.

Me too. I'd still want some scripts to bind them all together so I can recompile and \
run the unittests after messing with the libraries, of course. But that shouldn't be \
a problem. 

I would propose to keep the shared plugins with the libraries, though.

> Timeframe:
> Of course this would be complicated and not just svn mv etc. 

Also, it's important to figure out what to do when the migration to git happens.

> But I want to open the discussion about this and I would like to hear what we
> need to do (e.g. make some list of TODOs in wiki) to make this happen
> 
> Benefits:

<snip good benefits>

> o free hugs 
> I will hug you if you get involved and make this happen

Erm... Please keep the hugs for your S.O. -- you're a bit too solid for me! 

There's one or two disadvantages as well: by breaking up the source, we lose \
coherence, and that might making sure nothing breaks more difficult. It also might \
fragment the community more, and make releasing more complex.

-- 
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.valdyas.org
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel


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