On Thursday, August 19, 2010 04:42:42 pm Thomas Zander wrote: > On Thursday 19. August 2010 17.02.59 Arno Rehn wrote: > > With KDE bindings we have the problem that many people only want the Qt- > > specific part of the bindings (like QtRuby or Qyoto) - and then only for > > one language. Having all of the different bindings in a KDE module makes > > it difficult for them to install only the Qt portion and even prevents > > some people from contributing (there's already a fork of QtRuby on > > github, because people don't like checking out the complete kdebindings > > and then going through the hassle of figuring out how to compile only > > QtRuby). > > Is this really *the* problem? > With a total checkout size of 116Mb I'm thinking the git repo is not really > that big. Maybe you can give us an exact number of the unsplitted size. That isn't the issue.
> Figuring out which one to compile sounds even stranger; the detection is > pretty advanced and it won't even try to compile the parts you don't > touch. Well qt-only guys like the MeeGo people don't wan't the compilation of the qt- only and tools parts of kdebindings depending on advanced and complex cmake macros. > The reason for keeping it together is because the KDE team intends to > release the bindings as a 'kdebindings' for each KDE release. One git repo > then equals one tarball that is released. I think Thiago gave a nice > overview of the reasons behind that; which I won't repeat here as this is > a discussion that should not be reopened again without really good reasons > :-) I wasn't involved in this discussion. > As Aaron wrote some time ago; "Its a discussion we had and closed, its > decided" ? > The reasons you cite are not entirely convincing to me, at this late stage, > to warrent a change in strategy. A change in strategy in general, or a change in strategy for kdebindings? -- Richard _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
