Am Montag, 08. Juni 2015, 17.21:56 schrieb Benjamin Reed: Morning
> On 6/8/15 11:02 AM, Eric Hameleers wrote: > > The only sane way forward is that every Frameworks release contains > > all Frameworks tarballs, regardless of updates since the previous > > public release. Every Framework should adhere to the overall version > > number. > > Yeah, this proposal makes no sense to me. Then please read the thread on kde-frameworks-devel as there is some sense in this proposal. We might decide against it in the end but to say that it doesn't make sense is just not valid. > If you want to individually > manage a library with an independent numbering scheme, then shouldn't it > be a separate/external project? The whole point of the "framework" is > to provide a monolithic thing that has everything you need. Either I don't get this sarcasm or you might be wrong. "The whole point" of KDE Frameworks is that it is _modular_ and not monolithic as kdelibs was. As I see it the value of KDE Frameworks is the set of Qt Addons with a unique license and spreading over different platforms. A high quality set of additional features and libraries for Qt developers from developers with a lot of experience. I don't think that the same version number of all released Frameworks as it currently stands is the strong point of KDE Frameworks. But this addition of libraries to KDE Frameworks with a different version schema or semantics might add too much problems (althought I read some valid points in Christian's emails) and we might need to cancel this idea. But that's why we're dicussing it here and why David asked the quesion here and thus let's try to stay constructive (and this is not just to Benjamins email). Thanks Mario _______________________________________________ release-team mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/release-team
