On Tuesday 29 January 2013, David Faure wrote:
OTOH, there's also reasons to not split too early. It depended on quite
some stuff in other modules last I checked (could have changed), moving
it to another repo that early means less eyeballs and build problems
likely caught later.
We
On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:22:29 Kevin Ottens wrote:
Kidding of course. You're right it's probably fine for that one if they keep
updating kdelibs/frameworks during development to avoid diverging too
quickly. Which is indeed likely the case in that team.
yes, we'd commit to making sure it
On Wednesday 30 January 2013, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:22:29 Kevin Ottens wrote:
Kidding of course. You're right it's probably fine for that one if they
keep updating kdelibs/frameworks during development to avoid diverging
too quickly. Which is indeed likely
On Wednesday 30 January 2013 12:38:06 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
On Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:22:29 Kevin Ottens wrote:
Kidding of course. You're right it's probably fine for that one if they
keep updating kdelibs/frameworks during development to avoid diverging
too quickly. Which is indeed
On Monday 28 January 2013 18:54:12 Stephen Kelly wrote:
Marco Martin wrote:
Most important, what is the less messy git way to do it?
As we discussed on IRC, it may be better to split plasma out into its own
repo now already, like we did with nepomuk.
OTOH, there's also reasons to not split
On Tuesday 29 January 2013 09:11:54 Stephen Kelly wrote:
Kevin Ottens wrote:
OTOH, there's also reasons to not split too early. It depended on quite
some stuff in other modules last I checked (could have changed), moving it
to another repo that early means less eyeballs and build problems
On Tuesday 29 January 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote:
plasma repo and discovers they now need another include or whatever. Then
it just depends on how often they update/build. People working on
frameworks/plasma are not inexperienced newbies who don't know how to fix
minor issues like that (and
On Tuesday 29 January 2013 09:03:00 Kevin Ottens wrote:
On Monday 28 January 2013 18:54:12 Stephen Kelly wrote:
Marco Martin wrote:
Most important, what is the less messy git way to do it?
As we discussed on IRC, it may be better to split plasma out into its own
repo now already, like
Hi all,
As you know, Plasma is composed mainly by two parts: the library, now in
kdelibs and a runtime part, now in kde-runtime.
the runtime part is basically:
* QML imports
* A scriptengine to write plasmoids in QML, dataengines in javascript etc
* a kpart
* default theme
* some command line
Marco Martin wrote:
Most important, what is the less messy git way to do it?
As we discussed on IRC, it may be better to split plasma out into its own
repo now already, like we did with nepomuk.
As the frameworks branch has a 'use-by' date, I'd prefer not to import more
things into it from
On Monday 28 January 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote:
Marco Martin wrote:
Most important, what is the less messy git way to do it?
As we discussed on IRC, it may be better to split plasma out into its own
repo now already, like we did with nepomuk.
As the frameworks branch has a 'use-by' date,
11 matches
Mail list logo
