On Tuesday 15 of July 2014 21:47:32 Syam Krishnan wrote:
On 07/15/2014 05:39 PM, Daniel Vrátil wrote:
> speaking with my KDE PIM developer hat on, I think it makes a lot of sense
> to actually split the package per-app, so we would have
> kdepim-akonadiconsole (I'd actually prefer if this was not installed by
> default, so that people would not be tempted to play with it :P)
> kdepim-libs (libs shared by multiple PIM apps)
> kdepim-common (?) (shared executables, like incidenceeditor-ng, Akonadi
> agents, etc)
One suggestion (apologies in advance if I've not understood it
correctly). Why "kdepim-*" naming for applications? It might make sense
for libraries, but not applications.
I think its better to just have kontact, korganizer etc. rather than
with "kdepim-" prefix.
I think we had something like this for kate, okteta etc. which was
sometimes irritating since one had to yum search for "*kate*" to figure
out the package name for installation. Anyway, nowadays, its just kate
and okteta, and I'm liking it.
I think that this would require having a spec file for each application, which
would make updating and building a big pain, since whole KDE PIM would have to
be built every time (please correct me if I'm wrong), because the entire KDE
PIM is released as a single tarball. If we want to package these apps as
subpackages in the same .spec file, the kdepim prefix cannot be avoided.
This is definitely going to change with KDE Applications 5 (or whetever this
is going to be called), when each KDE PIM application will have it's own git
repository and a release tarball. But this is still at least a year, maybe two
years in future.
kde mailing list
New to KDE4? - get help from http://userbase.kde.org
Daniel Vrátil | dvratil(a)redhat.com | dvratil on #kde-devel, #kontact, #akonadi
KDE Desktop Team
Associate Software Engineer, Red Hat
GPG Key: 0xC59D614F6F4AE348
Fingerprint: 4EC1 86E3 C54E 0B39 5FDD B5FB C59D 614F 6F4A E348