FYI,

I forwarded the naming scheme message to the Kubuntu Developers list for 
comment (since Kubuntu will follow Debian's lead on this).  I'll forward any 
other replies I get too.

Scott K


----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: Re: Naming scheme for KDE Configuration Modules
Date: Tuesday 02 February 2010
From: Celeste Lyn Paul <cele...@kde.org>
To: Kubuntu Developer Discussion <kubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com>

Option D kde-config-*. KCM is a description of the technical
implementation and not a description of the purpose of system
settings. If a new module framework was developed, the concept of kcm
could become obsolete. D would also work well with standalone modules
outside the shell.

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Scott Kitterman <ubu...@kitterman.com> wrote:
> FYI. We should plan on following Debian in this,  so now is the time to 
weigh in.
>
> Scott K
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Naming scheme for KDE Configuration Modules
> From: "Didier 'OdyX' Raboud" <did...@raboud.com>
> To: pkg-kde-talk@lists.alioth.debian.org
> CC:
>
> Hi all,
>
> as was discussed this afernoon (GMT+1) on IRC, we have no clear consensus on
> binary package names for KDE Configuration Modules, mainly because we don't
> have many packages of that sort yet. The question arises because there is an
> ITP on kcm-touchpad (#568040).
>
> I think that such a consensus is a good thing, even if not absolutely
> necessary.
>
>  ==== What we have now ====
>
>        system-config-gtk-kde           (src: gtk-qt-engine)
>        system-config-printer-kde       (src: kdeadmin)
>
> The "KDE System Configuration" binary is in the
>
>        systemsettings          (src: kdebase-workspace)
>
> And I think that's mostly it.
>
>  ==== Options ====
>
> We have discussed those four options (there are certainly more):
>
>        a) system-config-*-kde
>        b) kcm-*
>        c) kde-control-module-*
>        d) kde-config-*
>
>  ==== Pros and cons ====
>
> a)      system-config-*-kde
>    + Is already in the archive, down to Squeeze
>    + Is pretty explicit
>    - was mostly pushed by myself, with no real consensus
>    - pollutes the system-config-* namespace, originally used for
>      RedHat utilities, which have then been ported to KDE (thus the
>      -printer-kde)
>
> b)      kcm-*
>    + Short
>    + Already in use by other distros (OpenSuse, Ubuntu, …)
>    - Not really explicit
>
> c)      kde-control-module-*
>    + Explicit
>    - Might become really long
>
> d)      kde-config-*
>    + Explicit, even if slightly less than the latter
>
>  ==== My opinion (if that matters…) ===
>
> I am now in favor of changing our actual packages to d) (kde-config-*), but
> I am of course open to discussion. And for what matters, I really find b)
> (kcm-*) ugly.
>
> I also note that this could lead to a renaming of systemsettings to the "no-
> wildcard" version of the naming scheme we could now choose.
>
>  ===== Conclusion ===
>
> So what is your opinion ?
>
> Best regards and thanks for reading so far.
>
> OdyX
>
>
>
>
> --
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk
> --
> kubuntu-devel mailing list
> kubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
>
>



-- 
Celeste Lyn Paul
KDE Usability Project
KDE e.V. Board of Directors
www.kde.org

-- 
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel


-------------------------------------------------------
-- 
What have you done to help win the war TODAY?

--
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-kde-talk

Reply via email to