On Sunday 27 December 2009 8:34:23 am Maciej Mrozowski wrote: > On Tuesday 22 of December 2009 21:32:29 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > > > Now, in kdelibs there's a little inconsistency with Nepomuk related > > > CMake options logic: > > > - Soprano is always required > > > - SDO is optional > > > - Nepomuk libs are built when both Soprano (with all needed backends > > > and parsers) and SDO are found > > > > Proposals (patch): > > > - find_library(Soprano) -> macro_optional_find_library(Soprano) keeping > Soprano backend checks (so only Soprano with all needed backends is accepted) > > > - other minor changes in FindNepomuk.cmake: > > > * set "url" in macro_log_feature of Soprano to > http://soprano.sourceforge.net/ > > > * accidental trailing spaces removals > > > > Other proposal - to make SDO mandatory > > > Actually I'd almost suggest make all that manadatory (soprano, SDO 0.2, > > nepomuk), and if people scream, at least we maybe finally get to some real > > solution. Right now it is just broken if nepomuk is optional but a hard > > requirement in kdepim. > > Actually one of those people screaming would be me :) > From my perspective it's much more convenient to have Nepomuk libs (and thus > soprano and SDO dependencies) optional for 4.4 as well. > Besides the only tool in kdepim that needs Nepomuk libs to build is mentioned > akonadiconsole which is more or less developer tool and not user application > and at least in current state - akonadi can live without Nepomuk QueryServer. > Also, one would argue but kdepim used to be quite standalone product (not > part > of KDE4 Workspace, actively maintained also for KDE 3.5), so imho there's no > need to force some dependency for kdelibs only because it's mandatory in > kdepim. > While keeping if (NEPOMUK_FOUND) and alike CMake code is considerable > maintenance cost - this cost has already been born so there's nothing else to > do for 4.4 (and dropping this code to simplify CMake files relying on the > fact > that Nepomuk libs being mandatory would cause another maintenance cost). > So I'm for > > > Or just ask for a comment on [email protected] ? > > Problem is, the last times I asked we didn't come to a real conclusion, > > there were not too many people who answered... > > In such case I guess it should be "who does the job - decides". > > (updated and reattached patch again as crossposting) >
>From a kdepim point-of-view, Nepomuk must be a hard dependency as Kontact will have big problems without it. So either Nepomuk is a hard dependency for kdelibs or for kdepim. Might as well keep it a hard dependency for kdelibs. -Allen, KDEPIM module coordinator _______________________________________________ release-team mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team
