On Saturday 10 March 2012 12:18:06 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > To summarize: do you say it is ok to let every KDE frameworks git > repository decide for its own which versions of Qt and CMake it requires ?
No, not if there is no good reason for it. I'm being pragmatic. konversation wants to keep building with an old kdelibs for a good reason (developer convenience, for people using old libs). On the other hand, I see the KDE frameworks as a bunch of libs released *together*. Which means: 1) they can depend on each other of the same version (kguiaddons-5.1.0 can rely on kcoreaddons-5.1.0) 2) the last stable Qt release must be good enough for all of them. But why not *allow* "simple" frameworks to keep working with an older Qt? As a framework developer or a full-KDE developer you would just use the latest Qt, but the developer of QFooBar can use the latest libkarchive with an old Qt, as long as libkarchive doesn't require anything from a newer Qt. I don't think that's messy, I think that's flexibility that people want. I don't see how you jump from "some frameworks can keep working with an older Qt" to "KDE frameworks means nothing, they are just independent libs". They are not (tier2 libs depend on tier1 libs, and they are all released together). If I'm overlooking something and allowing older Qt or older cmake versions is too messy, I can be convinced otherwise about that, it's a minor point IMHO. However points 1) and 2) above are strong points IMHO. PS: Look at the current situation: akonadi requires Qt >= 4.6.0, and kdelibs-4.8 requires Qt >= 4.7.0. Are you aware of any damage created by this? I don't. -- David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr Sponsored by Nokia to work on KDE, incl. KDE Frameworks 5 _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
