> On Nov. 28, 2013, 3:43 p.m., Kevin Ottens wrote: > > Looks fine to me. Makes me wonder if we want to drop the K for the target > > name "KF5::ConfigCore"? Just like Qt5Widgets becomes Qt5::Widgets... > > Martin Klapetek wrote: > Can do. Imho it makes sense but I'll wait for some other opinions so I > don't have to redo/undo all of it then. Will try to still do it by tonight. > > Martin Klapetek wrote: > No comments on dropping the K? I'm about to do this... > > Martin Gräßlin wrote: > +1 > > Martin Klapetek wrote: > While working on it, I realized that it may not be so good to drop the K > from target name after all...unless we change the package names too, > otherwise we'd be finding package KConfig and linking to KF5::Config, plus > all the classes are named KConfig*...so the library in target_link_libs would > be quite inconsistent with the rest. > > Please advise. > > Alex Merry wrote: > If we want to follow Qt's example, we would rename the package KF5Config, > and leave the classes as KConfig*. This is a fairly substantial naming > change to the packages, though, especially as the consistent thing would be > to have KF5Solid and KF5ThreadWeaver, for example. > > Which I'm generally in favour of, actually. I'm especially dubious about > the names of the ItemModels and ItemViews packages, which are really quite > generic.
Yep, ItemModels and ItemViews would definitely benefit from being prefixed. XmlGui as well... Overall it looks more and more like welcome consistency to me. - Kevin ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114182/#review44703 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Nov. 28, 2013, 1:46 p.m., Martin Klapetek wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114182/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 28, 2013, 1:46 p.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Frameworks. > > > Repository: kdelibs > > > Description > ------- > > This is just one framework - KConfig - if this is the proper way to do this, > I'll update this review with all frameworks updated to this. > > > Diffs > ----- > > tier1/kconfig/autotests/CMakeLists.txt cc2626b > tier1/kconfig/src/core/CMakeLists.txt c8a4842 > tier1/kconfig/src/gui/CMakeLists.txt b677d03 > tier1/kconfig/src/kconf_update/CMakeLists.txt 69668bc > > Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114182/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Builds. > > > Thanks, > > Martin Klapetek > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
