On Mon, 31 Aug 2015, Dmitry Kazakov wrote:
1) I'm ok with forking Krita repository. We already depend from
quite few libraries from calligra libs. That is mostly, KoCanvasBase,
KoDocumentBase, flake and pigment.From all four
only pigment looks
reusable enough for me to have a separate repo. In our code we hack
quite a lot to adapt flake and document classes for our needs.
2) One more benefit of forking to another repository would be that the size
of the repo would become lower (correct me if I'm wrong). Since "Krita for
Cats" manual is still
semi-official way of building
Krita on some platforms this is really crucial for many users.
Quite a lot of people still have GPRS or limited internet, so downloading
700MiB just to try Krita *is* a barrier.
Another problem is
translators. Basically, they need to have a full source tree around
to be able to check where the string comes from.
The repo size is one reason I'm actually considering to drop all
history. Create a fresh new repo with cleaned-up code only and start
again from commit 0. I know we check history a lot, but that history is
the history of Krita up to Krita 2.9.x, which is in the calligra repo.
This will make our life really hard :(
Well, it's something to consider if size of the final repo is important.
Boudewijn
_______________________________________________
calligra-devel mailing list
calligra-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel
