On Tuesday 06 May 2008, Tom Albers wrote: > Op dinsdag 06 mei 2008 18:46 schreef u: > > Am Dienstag, 6. Mai 2008, um 18:39 Uhr, schrieb Tom Albers: > > > Op dinsdag 06 mei 2008 18:30 schreef u: > > > > > I disagree. I think it is a must to be BC between minor releases.
Not for a rarely-used lib like one that kdeutils would provide, IMHO. > > > > For me it would be more work, > > > > as I would have development spanned between extragear/libs and kdeutils. > > > > And it would add an additional (if only soft) dependency between > > > > modules. > > > > > > No, as long as you make releases from the library, it's is just another > > > 'external' dependency. As long as it is not a cyclic dependency as we now > > > face with libkipi, it is not a problem. > > > > We misunderstand each other? > > kdeutils/okteta would depend on extragear/libs/okteta. Now it does not. > > Think of the packagers. And checkouts of KDE's repository. > > No. it is perfectly fine for a kdeutils app to depend on a library. If that > happens to live in kde's svn too, that's fine. > It is up to you to keep the kdeutils app compilable to your latest release of > the lib. I disagree. There's stuff in extragear that needs the "base kde modules" (trunk/KDE/*), so we shouldn't have the reverse dependency. trunk/KDE can depend on kdesupport libs, but not on extragear libs - extragear is compiled *after* trunk/KDE, otherwise we have a cyclic dependency. -- David Faure, [EMAIL PROTECTED], sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE, Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org). _______________________________________________ release-team mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team
