---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/103093/#review8204
---
This review has been submitted with commit
On Monday, November 14, 2011 21:43:12 Valentin Rusu wrote:
What would be the current beautiful plug-in implementation to take as an
example?
there are some tutorials here:
http://techbase.kde.org/Development/Tutorials#Services:_Applications_and_Plugins
this one gets right to it:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/103131/#review8208
---
This review has been submitted with commit
Andrea Diamantini wrote:
Ok, let's wait 18 months to see private browsing fixed. Going to update
bug reports...
Try nagging distros to backport your (or your contributors') patches.
Unfortunately, it looks like trying to convince the kdelibs maintainers at
KDE is a lost cause, as you can see
Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at wrote:
Andrea Diamantini wrote:
Ok, let's wait 18 months to see private browsing fixed. Going to
update
bug reports...
Try nagging distros to backport your (or your contributors') patches.
Unfortunately, it looks like trying to convince the kdelibs
On 11/14/2011 09:19 PM, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
Valentin: please let me know when ksecretservice is in its own repo,
I just removed ksecretsservice from kdelibs and kde-runtime.
Next move will be inclusion in ksecrets repository.
--
Valentin Rusu (IRC valir, KDE vrusu)
KSecretsService (former
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/103148/
---
Review request for kdelibs.
Description
---
Fixes build errors due
Am Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:17:45 -0500
schrieb Scott Kitterman k...@kitterman.com:
It is probably worth a discussion on packagers to share cross-distro
ideas about what kdelibs feature patches to ship with 4.8.
While Scott's suggestion to have a commonly downstream patched
kdelibs 4.8 may on first
On 11/15/2011 02:46 PM, Thomas Lübking wrote:
Am Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:17:45 -0500
schrieb Scott Kittermank...@kitterman.com:
It is probably worth a discussion on packagers to share cross-distro
ideas about what kdelibs feature patches to ship with 4.8.
While Scott's suggestion to have a
Am Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:20:44 -0500
schrieb Scott Kitterman k...@kitterman.com:
a) drain sources from KDE frameworks
Only if the people that would work on this would otherwise work on
KDE Frameworks. AFAIK, that's not the case.
If one wants a feature in future KDE versions and such fork
On Tuesday 15 November 2011, Thomas Lübking wrote:
Am Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:20:44 -0500
schrieb Scott Kitterman k...@kitterman.com:
...
It's already happening, so the real question is how to minimize the
impact.
This is why i've posted this mail in the first place.
Minimizing the
On 11/15/2011 04:08 PM, Thomas Lübking wrote:
Am Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:20:44 -0500
schrieb Scott Kittermank...@kitterman.com:
a) drain sources from KDE frameworks
Only if the people that would work on this would otherwise work on
KDE Frameworks. AFAIK, that's not the case.
If one wants a
On 11/15/2011 10:16 PM, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
Minimizing the impact means to align up- and downstream, ie. find
a way to provide features *now* w/o really opening kdelibs to new
features but at best accelerate frameworks development.
(as you probably read in the rest and unfortunately not
Hi all,
Perhaps as a solution to this, kdelibs master could have features
added to it, but only by a couple of gatekeepers who would
simultaneously ensure that the feature also lands in frameworks at the
same time? Obviously frameworks is going to be the future, however it
seems there are some
Am Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:28:21 -0500
schrieb Scott Kitterman k...@kitterman.com:
Are there any examples of people who started working on the Frameworks port
because kdelibs 4.8 doesn't exist?
I don't know and that's still not the topic.
I didn't and do not suggest that developers who want
Scott Kitterman wrote:
It is probably worth a discussion on packagers to share cross-distro ideas
about what kdelibs feature patches to ship with 4.8. Having some
commonality at least among the distros seemslike a good idea to me.
Please move this to kde-packager. It's off topic for
Thomas Lübking wrote:
And that is gonna happen in what way if it's not in any lib?
Static linking?! External lib? Problem solved?
Applications which are not part of KDE SC might end up just requiring a
patched kdelibs to even build.
Kevin Kofler
In case someone is interested since it has never mentioned in this list, there
is a frameworks mailing list at kde-frameworks-devel
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
Albert
Am Tue, 15 Nov 2011 23:50:35 +0100
schrieb Kevin Kofler kevin.kof...@chello.at:
Thomas Lübking wrote:
And that is gonna happen in what way if it's not in any lib?
Static linking?! External lib? Problem solved?
Applications which are not part of KDE SC might end up just requiring
a
Thomas Lübking wrote:
Therefore my suggestion (if opening 4.x even as wrapper linking
frameworks is no option) would be to compile the features into the
application requiring it right now rather than forking a library
because you cannot alter it. (Don't forget: this is about covering the
time
20 matches
Mail list logo
