On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 08:12:20AM +0100, Torgny Nyblom wrote: > An objection here, to do this with the rules will silently alter > history. > i think that's the whole idea here. the entire kate history is already in a separate repo, so unless one'd want to be able to check out historically accurate revisions of kdelibs (which is a pipe dream anyway), there is no reason to duplicate it.
fwiw, kate's approach to put everything actually related into one repo is an explicit violation of the kdelibs vs. kdebase-runtime concept (though they circumvented it in the first place by putting kwrite under apps and kate into kdesdk). as it happens, i think they are right with doing that ... the same should happen with kdesu and probably some other modules, and the libs/runtime split should be a distributor-only thing. _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
