On Thursday 10 October 2013, Milian Wolff wrote: > On Wednesday 09 October 2013 19:26:48 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Wednesday 09 October 2013, Lubomir Rintel wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I know it's a bit too early, but still better than late. I'd like to > > > know your thoughts about the way KF5 frameworks will be packaged for > > > Linux distributions. > > > > > > I'm currently working on including Hawaii desktop (based around a Qt5 > > > and Wayland-based compositor) in Fedora. We aim at delivering it around > > > two Fedora releases in future therefore it makes sense to work on > > > packaging already. It currently depends on frameworks from kdelibs > > > framework branch (currently it's probably just tier1/solid) and extra > > > cmake modules. > > > > > > I'm wondering what's your position on naming the packages? Does kf5-* > > > prefix (kf5-solid, kf5-extra-cmake-modules) make sense to you? OpenSUSE > > > seems to use that (except that they don't include the prefix for ECM). > > > > IMHO extra-cmake-modules really should not get a "kf5" prefix, this would > > IMO at least partly defeat its purpose. It was intended as addons for > > cmake (which happen to be useful for KDE), not as a tier0 package of > > KF5. Not sure if this changed though. > > This. At least from what I understood in that regard, esp. from listening > to the KF5 talk at dev days yesterday.
What do you mean with "This." ? Alex
