Re: CI system maintainability

Hi, On 2019 M03 28, Thu 16:04:01 CET Boudhayan Gupta wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 at 15:21, Kevin Ottens wrote: > > Hello, > > > > On Thursday, 28 March 2019 14:33:59 CET laurent Montel wrote: > > > I am against to force mandatory review, as it will create a lot of lose > > > > of > >

D9394: Show "Search wrapped" message in center of view for better visibility

neundorf accepted this revision. neundorf added a comment. This revision is now accepted and ready to land. Definitely an improvement :-) REPOSITORY R39 KTextEditor BRANCH SearchMessages (branched from master) REVISION DETAIL https://phabricator.kde.org/D9394 To: dhaumann, neundorf,

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 22:48:52 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Hi, > > > On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 22:12:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > > > ... > > > >> And the big benefit: One can install my alpha crashy something quality > >> Kate > >> > >> bundle with its Qt something version

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 22:12:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote: ... > And the big benefit: One can install my alpha crashy something quality Kate > bundle with its Qt something version and some imaginary Krita bundle that > is installed in parallel will NOT be borked! are you more or less arg

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 13:08:46 Dominik Haumann wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > I think that is more or less what we had in the past with the "kdewin" > > installer, that is like the cygwin installer pulling in all stuff you > > need and a set of ap

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 20:23:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Hi, > > > Christoph. > > > > I have had similar goals for a while, but haven't reached the point > > that I was having much success yet in that regard. One thing to keep > > in mind when developing installers, Qt Installer Framewor

Re: Versioning of Frameworks

On Sunday, May 10, 2015 15:39:02 David Faure wrote: > On Sunday 10 May 2015 12:36:53 Christian Mollekopf wrote: > > * I'd consider Qt to be a lower level library. Qt mostly provides > > fundamentals just like libc or the STL, > > and it's therefore okay for me to just work with what I have availabl

Re: Versioning of Frameworks

On Friday, May 08, 2015 10:32:22 Christian Mollekopf wrote: > On Tue, May 5, 2015, at 05:38 PM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: ... > > The versioning would be a complete mess: each framework having > > a > > different version number, some doing bug fix releases, some don't. > > ...that "complete mess" is j

Re: Versioning of Frameworks

On Tuesday, May 05, 2015 11:33:03 Christian Mollekopf wrote: > Hey David, > > Sorry for the late response. > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2015, at 08:34 PM, David Faure wrote: > > On Tuesday 28 April 2015 12:17:00 Christian Mollekopf wrote: > > > Our dependency tree is now indeed reduced, but if we want to

Re: AndroidToolchain.cmake in ECM

On Thursday, July 10, 2014 22:23:09 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Dijous, 3 de juliol de 2014, a les 02:04:31, Aleix Pol va escriure: > > Hi, > > As you might have seen on my blog post [1], I've been working on Android > > support for kde. Part of this effort resulted in a cmake toolchain file we

Re: KDE Frameworks Release Cycle

On Thursday, May 08, 2014 22:08:06 David Faure wrote: > [Taking k-c-d out, too much cross-posting] > > On Monday 05 May 2014 21:54:42 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > If we have more than 50 libraries, do all of them need a full new release > > every month ? > > Not do

Re: KDE Frameworks Release Cycle

On Sunday, May 04, 2014 16:27:44 Luigi Toscano wrote: > Kevin Ottens ha scritto: > > So, we had a team discussion here with Albert, Aleix, Alex, Alex, > > Aurélien, > > David, Rohan and myself. We juggled with several options, trying to > > address > > > > the following constraints: > > * We don'

Re: Review Request 114904: Remove KDE4 magic from _SET_FANCY in KDEInstallDirs.cmake

t now where or who it was. - Alexander Neundorf On Jan. 7, 2014, 9:18 p.m., Alex Merry wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard

Re: substitution for KDE4_ADD_APP_ICON cmake macro

On Sunday 29 December 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Friday 20 December 2013 14:59:45 Michal Humpula wrote: > > Hi there, > > > > I was wondering if there is a recommended migration path from > > KDE4_ADD_APP_ICON cmake makro. > > This stuff is indeed missing on > http://techbase.kde.org/Developme

Re: pkg-config files

On Thursday 26 December 2013, Alex Merry wrote: > How much do we care about users of frameworks who don't use CMake? Do > we want to provide pkg-config files? How easy is it to do so? > > (My personal answers would be: enough to put in a little effort, but not > a huge one; yes, if it's easy; th

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

CMAKE_BUILD_TYPE CACHE property accordingly, i.e. both still list DebugFull, Profile and Coverage as available build types. - Alexander Neundorf On Nov. 11, 2013, 10:16 p.m., Sune Vuorela wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generat

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

> On Nov. 12, 2013, 7:24 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > IMO the patch as it is is not good. > > > > Several things: > > 1) This file, is not mandatory at all with KDE frameworks. > > You can build applications using KDE frameworks libraries without i

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

> On Nov. 12, 2013, 7:24 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > IMO the patch as it is is not good. > > > > Several things: > > 1) This file, is not mandatory at all with KDE frameworks. > > You can build applications using KDE frameworks libraries without i

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Tuesday 12 November 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > On Tuesday 12 November 2013 20:04:38 Sune Vuorela wrote: > > On 2013-11-11, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > > would that work for everyone? > > > > I don't think it solves the actual hard point: > > > > Where should the final home for the stuff in ecm

Re: Having a Tier 0 for cmake and git submodules

On Sunday 10 November 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > Hello, > > Since there's been several times discussions about having a kind of "Tier > 0" for building our frameworks containing what is right now in ECM > kde-modules directory, but the idea was never really on the table because > of the extra dep

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

> On Nov. 12, 2013, 7:24 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > IMO the patch as it is is not good. > > > > Several things: > > 1) This file, is not mandatory at all with KDE frameworks. > > You can build applications using KDE frameworks libraries without i

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

> On Nov. 12, 2013, 7:24 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > IMO the patch as it is is not good. > > > > Several things: > > 1) This file, is not mandatory at all with KDE frameworks. > > You can build applications using KDE frameworks libraries without i

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Monday 11 November 2013, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: ... > in my mind this allows: > > * an immediate release of ecm > * allows KDE to back it rather than have ecm distanced from KDE > * this gives ecm a needed “reference customer” > * this gives KDE a first step into the “we’re a communi

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

> On Nov. 12, 2013, 7:24 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > IMO the patch as it is is not good. > > > > Several things: > > 1) This file, is not mandatory at all with KDE frameworks. > > You can build applications using KDE frameworks libraries without i

Re: Having a Tier 0 for cmake and git submodules

On Sunday 10 November 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > Hello, > > Since there's been several times discussions about having a kind of "Tier > 0" for building our frameworks containing what is right now in ECM > kde-modules directory, but the idea was never really on the table because > of the extra dep

Re: Having a Tier 0 for cmake and git submodules

On Monday 11 November 2013, Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 10:48 PM, David Faure wrote: > > On Monday 11 November 2013 01:06:33 Michael Pyne wrote: > > > On Sun, November 10, 2013 20:11:07 David Faure wrote: > > > > On Sunday 10 November 2013 13:44:09 Michael Pyne wrote: > > > > > I

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Monday 11 November 2013, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Sunday, November 3, 2013 20:51:57 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > I wanted to release ECM as fast as possible, since this was one of the > > main points I got from the platform meeting in Randa in June 2011: > > people w

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

> (I can't remember doing that, but maybe I did it without realizing ;) > > David Faure wrote: > OK, the alternative is of course to submit a patch to cmake to change > Debug from -g to -g3. That's the best solution, of course. Alex? Stephen? > > Alexander Ne

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

> On Nov. 12, 2013, 12:02 a.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > Maybe I've missed something, but I would like to have it explained somehow. > > Why is it bad to define such values? How will g++ calls compare? > > Nicolás Alvarez wrote: > In normal CMake, -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Debug builds withou

Re: Review Request 113805: Do not change the build types available with cmake

uot; CACHE STRING "docs..." FORCE) endif() This way it would be only on the initial cmake run forced into the cache, and afterwards the user should be able to change them as he wants. - Alexander Neundorf On Nov. 11, 2013, 10:16 p.m., Sune Vuorela wrote: > > --

Re: Having a Tier 0 for cmake and git submodules

On Sunday 10 November 2013, Sune Vuorela wrote: > On 2013-11-10, Kevin Ottens wrote: > > --===3596639883239406900== > > Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1424144.VkBYIHTjbs"; > > micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" > > > > > > --nextPart1424144.VkB

Re: Having a Tier 0 for cmake and git submodules

On Sunday 10 November 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Sunday 10 November 2013 17:57:00 Kevin Ottens wrote: > > Now back to the submodules sha-1 update... The only thing I see to easily > > overcome that for our developers, is to have a hook, which would update > > the submodules for all the framework

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Sunday 10 November 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > On Sunday 10 November 2013 16:27:06 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Sunday 10 November 2013, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > > On Sunday 10 November 2013, David Faure wrote: > > > > On Sunday 03 November 2013 14:

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Sunday 10 November 2013, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Sunday 10 November 2013, David Faure wrote: > > On Sunday 03 November 2013 14:05:32 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > > To build karchive itself, they would need cmake + tier0-kf5 + ECM > > > > Which i

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Sunday 10 November 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Sunday 03 November 2013 14:05:32 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > To build karchive itself, they would need cmake + tier0-kf5 + ECM > > Which is exactly what I want to avoid. > > You wrote "To build software using karch

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Sunday 03 November 2013, Sune Vuorela wrote: > On 2013-11-03, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > This code unconditionally searches for QtCore (and sets a target property > > where I'm not sure how many people here can understand what's going on). > > It is

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Sunday 03 November 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > On Sunday 03 November 2013 14:05:32 Alexander Neundorf wrote: ... > > To build software using an installed karchive, they don't need anything > > but a compiler. > > To build software using karchive with cmake, they sti

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Sunday 03 November 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote: > Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > e.g. keeping code like always, unconditional, hardcoded searching for > > QtCore > > 'hardcoded' doesn't have any meaning in this context. > > The code you are talking abo

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Saturday 02 November 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote: > Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > In case we decide to go this way (i.e. the "my ideal view" plus optional > > downloading), and we should hear Stephens opinion on that, > > My opinion: > > 1) The current si

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Sune Vuorela wrote: > On 2013-11-01, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > Anyway, attached is a quick experiment, which adds the 3 KDE*.cmake > > files= > > > > from=20 > > > > extra-cmake-modules/ to kf5umbrella/, by that tu

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Saturday 02 November 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Saturday 02 November 2013 13:44:55 Stephen Kelly wrote: > > Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > > In case we decide to go this way (i.e. the "my ideal view" plus > > > optional downloading), and we should hear

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Saturday 02 November 2013, Luca Beltrame wrote: > Rex Dieter wrote: > > I can vouche for fedora/redhat that the buildsystem does not have > > internet access. > > Likewise, the OBS for openSUSE does not have net access during building. as I said, it is trivial and IMO mandatory to have that do

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Michael Pyne wrote: > On Fri, November 1, 2013 20:06:43 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > Anyway, attached is a quick experiment, which adds the 3 KDE*.cmake files > > from extra-cmake-modules/ to kf5umbrella/, by that turning it into > > tier0/, with

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Alexander Neundorf wrote: ... > If that option was enabled when installing kf5umbrella, kf5umbrella will > load that embedded ECM when asked for ECM. > In this quick hack attached here > find_package(KF5Umbrella) > unconditionally loads KDECMakeSettin

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Treeve Jelbert wrote: > On Friday 01 November 2013 15:46:30 Nicolás Alvarez wrote: ... > > Maven is a disgusting monstrosity used by the Java crowd where > > backwards compatibility rarely exists, and the approach to make things > > not break is to make packages depend o

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Mirko Boehm wrote: > On 11/01/2013 01:53 PM, Sune Vuorela wrote: > >> So far we chose the "have it in cmake/ecm" route. If we had what Mirko = > >> > >> > refers=20 > >> > to, then that'd open the door to another solution. > > > > And it would open the first door towar

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Mirko Boehm wrote: > On 11/01/2013 01:37 PM, Kevin Ottens wrote: > >> if a package foo uses ecm (or that non existing tier0 cmake package) > >> itself, > >> > >> > this does not mean that another package which uses foo, also needs ecm > >> > (or that tier0 package) at b

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Mirko Boehm wrote: > On 11/01/2013 11:25 AM, Sune Vuorela wrote: > >> and so forth. That would be a real breakthrough. It is related to the > >> approach taken by Maven and others. All it takes is a built-in way for > >> CMake to download the find_modules into a cache lo

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > Hello, > > On Friday 01 November 2013 11:23:14 Mirko Boehm wrote: > > On 11/01/2013 10:46 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > > [1] Why not merge that into CMake ? For quicker releases, and even > > > easier contribu

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Friday 01 November 2013, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > As a fact, all KF5 frameworks on these three files, including the ...all KF5 frameworks *depend* on these three files, including the... ___ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-de

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Thursday 31 October 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Thursday 31 October 2013 17:54:06 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > IOW, those three files exist only for KF5, and no other reason. > > This contradicts "use KDECMakeSettings.cmake in gammaray if you want > automatic RPATH h

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Thursday 31 October 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote: > Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > find_package(KF5 ... COMPONENTS karchive solid kcompletion) > > > > call in their CMakeLists.txt and get the same results. > > And if this works for tier3 libs, why not just do the sa

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Thursday 31 October 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Wednesday 30 October 2013 21:19:43 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Wednesday 30 October 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Soon I will be replacing code like > > > > > >

Re: Getting ecm files from the ECM package

On Wednesday 30 October 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote: > Hello, > > Soon I will be replacing code like > > find_package(KF5 REQUIRED CMake Compiler InstallDirs) > > with > > include(KDEInstallDirs) > include(KDECMakeSettings) > include(KDECompilerSettings) > > As I've said before, it makes no

Re: Review Request 113483: Copy KDE4 macro to install all icons in the current source dir

On Tuesday 29 October 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote: > Kevin Ottens wrote: > > Ship it! > > > > > > Looks fine to me and is aligned with prior discussions. > > Note that it is named ECM_foo, but it contains hardcoded KDE icon theme > names. Good point. As it is, IMO for being "ECM", it needs way mo

Re: cyclic dependency kinit - kservice

On Friday 25 October 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > On Friday 25 October 2013 11:14:19 David Narvaez wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Kevin Ottens wrote: > > > On Monday 21 October 2013 17:01:44 Treeve Jelbert wrote: > > >> kinit needs kservice and installs KInitMacros.cmake which defines

Re: Review Request 113406: Add a macro to automatically generate forward headers

cmake_parse_arguments() call. - Alexander Neundorf On Oct. 26, 2013, 9:35 a.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://git.reviewboard.kde.

extra-cmake-modules: remove ECMPrintVariables.cmake

Hi, e-c-m has a macro ecm_print_variables() >From the documentation: # Example: # ecm_print_variables(CMAKE_C_COMPILER # CMAKE_MAJOR_VERSION THIS_ONE_DOES_NOT_EXIST) # Gives: # -- CMAKE_C_COMPILER="/usr/bin/gcc" ; CMAKE_MAJOR_VERSION="2" ; # THIS_ONE_DOES_NOT_EXIST=

Re: Review Request 113406: Add a macro to automatically generate forward headers

> On Oct. 24, 2013, 1:54 p.m., Stephen Kelly wrote: > > modules/ECMGenerateHeaders.cmake, line 29 > > > > > > This variable shouldn't be needed at all. > > Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > Variable? Or argument? Wh

Re: Review Request 113373: Enable C++11 support by default.

> On Oct. 21, 2013, 8:06 p.m., Stephen Kelly wrote: > > As far as I know, only threadweaver and karchive will be released in > > December. The rest of the frameworks won't be released until summer. > > > > By summer, CMake 3.0.0 will most likely be out. > > Volker Krause wrote: > while th

Re: Review Request 113406: Add a macro to automatically generate forward headers

to ecm_generate_headers(CLASSES ClassA...ClassN [MODULE_NAME SomeName] [INSTALL_DIR /some/dir] ...) using the cmake_parse_arguments() function. - Alexander Neundorf On Oct. 23, 2013, 5:38 p.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > --- >

Re: Config files naming policy

On Monday 21 October 2013, Ivan Čukić wrote: > Hi all, > > Since we are now sharing the locations of our configs with non-kde > software, we can potentially get collisions with those. > > I'm proposing changing the names of the config files to org.kde.something > (or some other alternative). do

Re: KF5 Update Meeting Minutes 2013-w42

On Tuesday 15 October 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > Hello everyone, .. > * steveire recommends _LIBRARIES variables from Config files and the > template, Is there a verb missing in this sentence ? Alex ___ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-framework

Re: update your cmake!

On Thursday 10 October 2013, Sebastian Kügler wrote: > Hi, > > In order to build KF5 and Plasma2 code, you have to update your cmake to > 2.8.12. Otherwise, you'll get build errors. Doesn't it error out in cmake_minimum_required() ? If not, I'd suggest that somebody takes care of handling this pr

Re: libnm-qt Qt5 port: -fPIC or fPIE needed?

On Wednesday 09 October 2013, Sebastian Kügler wrote: > Hi, > > While porting libnm-qt to Qt5, I'm running into the following problem when > building the tests. I've not seen this error before, and I'd like advice > how to fix it. > > [ 59%] Building CXX object > tests/CMakeFiles/test_8021xsettin

Re: Review Request 112932: Update superbuild to include all tiered libraries

endencies from superbuild? Shouldn't > > > they depend on the Config.cmake files? > > > > Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > You mean after "DEPENDS" ? > > Because the superbuild CMakeLists.txt has no information otherwise > > which sub-build

Re: kio-related build error in plasma-framework

On Saturday 05 October 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Friday 04 October 2013 19:55:52 Sebastian Kügler wrote: > > On Friday, October 04, 2013 17:56:52 Sebastian Kügler wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm getting a build error in a few places in plasma-framework, kio > > > isn't found. I can't seem to

Re: more build problems around KIO

On Monday 07 October 2013, Sebastian Kügler wrote: > Hi, > > I'm still struggling to get kde-workspace (and kde-runtime) to build after > Friday's changes. Following Kevin's change in plasma-framework, I've > removed KIO from the KF5 imports. The problem is now: > > > CMake Warning at > /home/se

Re: Frameworks Overview

On Friday 27 September 2013, Ben Cooksley wrote: ... > Yep. At the moment there are no real contenders as such - which is why > it has not yet been replaced. > Phabricator is being monitored for progress on a blocking issue however. > > The primary issues are those of performance ( That's a pity.

Re: Review Request 112928: Template files for frameworks

> On Sept. 26, 2013, 8:27 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > template/CMakeLists.txt, line 22 > > <http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/112928/diff/5/?file=192796#file192796line22> > > > > The idea here was that you can simply list all required KF5 framework

Re: Review Request 112928: Template files for frameworks

> On Sept. 26, 2013, 8:27 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > template/CMakeLists.txt, line 22 > > <http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/112928/diff/5/?file=192796#file192796line22> > > > > The idea here was that you can simply list all required KF5 framework

Re: Review Request 112928: Template files for frameworks

> On Sept. 26, 2013, 8:27 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > template/CMakeLists.txt, line 22 > > <http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/112928/diff/5/?file=192796#file192796line22> > > > > The idea here was that you can simply list all required KF5 framework

Re: Fwd: Reminder: use KF5::foo instead of ${foo_LIBRARIES} in CMakeLists

On Thursday 26 September 2013, Aurélien Gâteau wrote: > On Wednesday 25 September 2013 18:08:31 you wrote: > [snip] > > > Do we know why do we need the KF5:: namespacing? > > I guess it is to avoid confusion: some frameworks are prefixed with 'k' but > others are not (frameworkintegration, itemmo

Re: Review Request 112928: Template files for frameworks

of the find_package(KF5) syntax: include(KDECMakeSettings) include(KDECompilerSettings) include(KDEInstallDirs) find_package(KCoreAddons) - Alexander Neundorf On Sept. 26, 2013, 2:37 p.m., Aurélien Gâteau wrote: > > --

Re: Making KDocTools independent of KArchive

On Wednesday 25 September 2013, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Dimarts, 24 de setembre de 2013, a les 14:09:57, Kevin Ottens va escriure: > > On Tuesday 24 September 2013 13:48:55 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > > El Dimarts, 24 de setembre de 2013, a les 08:49:20, Kevin Ottens va > > > > escriure: >

Re: Review Request 112932: Update superbuild to include all tiered libraries

> On Sept. 25, 2013, 2:03 p.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > Looks good to me, not adding the shipit because I'm clueless about > > superbuild. > > > > Why do we need to specify the dependencies from superbuild? Shouldn't they > > depend on the Config.cmake files? You mean after "DEPENDS" ?

Re: Fwd: Reminder: use KF5::foo instead of ${foo_LIBRARIES} in CMakeLists

On Wednesday 25 September 2013, Aurélien Gâteau wrote: ... > Unfortunately, ALIAS is a new feature of the add_library command, which is > only available in cmake git for now and will be in 2.8.12. Therefore we > cannot use this solution right now. This means we can't have standalone > builds of tie

Re: Frameworks Overview

On Tuesday 24 September 2013, Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Sep 24, 2013 7:33 AM, "Alexander Neundorf" wrote: > > On Monday 23 September 2013, Sebastian Kügler wrote: > > > Hey, > > > > > > On Monday, September 23, 2013 00:27:21 Cornelius Schumache

Re: Templates for frameworks CMake files

On Tuesday 24 September 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote: > Aurélien Gâteau wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I have been playing around with itemviews CMake files and put together > > some templates for the top level CMakeLists.txt and *Config.cmake.in. You > > can find them attached there. Any one against me addi

Re: Frameworks Overview

On Monday 23 September 2013, Sebastian Kügler wrote: > Hey, > > On Monday, September 23, 2013 00:27:21 Cornelius Schumacher wrote: > > On Thursday 19 September 2013 Sebastian Kügler wrote: > > > http://community.kde.org/Frameworks/Overview > > > > I have put the data on Inqlude (see http://inqlud

Re: Review Request 112901: Remove weird cmake indirections

by "SHARED"), add_library() automatically builds shared libs if BUILD_SHARED_LIBS is set to true (which it is in KDECMakeSettings.cmake) - Alexander Neundorf On Sept. 23, 2013, 5:08 p.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > >

Re: Review Request 112828: Provide ecm_add_unit_test() and ecm_add_multiple_unit_tests()

> On Sept. 23, 2013, 10:49 a.m., Kevin Ottens wrote: > > modules/ECMAddUnitTest.cmake, line 23 > > > > > > I agree, it's about "automated" (vs "manual") tests here. We've no way > > when writing this macro to know

Re: Review Request 112828: Provide ecm_add_unit_test() and ecm_add_multiple_unit_tests()

ul to KDE. So IMO it doesn't matter much how these tests are called in KF5. But all that is just my opinion, I leave it to Stephen to decide. - Alexander Neundorf On Sept. 19, 2013, 3:57 p.m., Alexander Richardson wrote: > > -

Re: kde4_add_plugin on KF5

On Thursday 19 September 2013, Alex Merry wrote: > On 19/09/13 17:00, Aleix Pol wrote: > > Hi, > > We should decide what we do with the add_plugin macro. Should I install > > it as kf5_add_plugin from KCoreAddons? Do we want something different or > > better? > > Would e-c-m be the right place for

Re: Review Request 112772: Create an ecm_mark_as_autotest macro

> On Sept. 17, 2013, 6:26 p.m., Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > The macro does more than the name implies, additionally to marking it as > > test it also actually adds the test. > > So I'd prefer a different name. > > > > Having said that, the CMakeLists.tx

Re: Review Request 112772: Create an ecm_mark_as_autotest macro

n can be written which can be used in all those places ? - Alexander Neundorf On Sept. 17, 2013, 12:35 p.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://git.reviewboard

Re: Dependency specifications

On Sunday 15 September 2013, Aleix Pol wrote: > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 7:42 PM, Stephen Kelly wrote: > > Aleix Pol wrote: > > > I'd say that all Qt dependencies in the module should be defined only > > > > once > > > > > in the root CMakeLists.txt. Actually this should be the only file with > >

Re: Plugin locator performance ballpark

On Sunday 08 September 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Thursday 05 September 2013 01:04:52 Sebastian Kügler wrote: > > Reading just $PLUGINS/kf5, 52 plugins > > > > 21893.0 microsec (KServiceTypeTrader) > > 95835.0 microsec (Metadata) > > > > --> Reading metadata is 4-5 slower, ~100ms > > > >

Re: Review Request 112451: Adapt the DocBook finders to newer naming conventions

REQUIRED_VARS DocBookXSL_DIR ) After that you can set the old UPPERCASE variables for compatibility if you want to. - Alexander Neundorf On Sept. 4, 2013, 2:50 p.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > --- > T

Re: Review Request 112451: Actually install the modules in the ecm attic

ALLUPPERCASE_SOMETHING to CamelCase_SOMETHING, i.e. to DocBookXSL_* and DocBookXML_*, to follow the cmake guidelines for naming variables better. When doing that, please add that change here: http://techbase.kde.org/Development/ECM_SourceIncompatChanges - Alexander Neundorf On Sept. 3, 2013, 12:45 p.m., Aleix

Re: Review Request 112451: Actually install the modules in the ecm attic

> On Sept. 2, 2013, 3:46 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > I'm pretty sure this is wrong. > > > > Attic == to be sorted out. > > > > If these two find modules are needed, extract them, clean them up (ensure > > they pass modern standards, whatever that is exactly for cmake modules, I > > assume th

Re: DBusMenuQt5 cmake foo

On Saturday 31 August 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Saturday 31 August 2013 02:51:09 Sebastian Kügler wrote: > > So I've tried both alternative, changing both calls to either DBusMenuQt > > or DBusMenuQt5, but neither of them works, both break over the package > > not being found, but required. > >

Re: Updating CMake requirement to 2.8.12 RC 1

On Tuesday 27 August 2013, Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > On Friday 23 August 2013, Ben Cooksley wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 7:14 PM, David Faure wrote: > >> > On Friday 23 August 2013 06:51:23 Martin

Re: Updating CMake requirement to 2.8.12 RC 1

On Tuesday 20 August 2013, Stephen Kelly wrote: > Hello, > > CMake 2.8.12 RC 1 was released a few hours ago: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.programming.tools.cmake.user/47443 > > Updating to that will allow us to get on the home straight with regard to > our buildsystem files. > > For

Re: Updating CMake requirement to 2.8.12 RC 1

On Friday 23 August 2013, Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 7:14 PM, David Faure wrote: > > On Friday 23 August 2013 06:51:23 Martin Graesslin wrote: > >> Given that it's already lots of work to keep up with the constant > >> breakage due to changes in frameworks the outlook of also h

Re: I'm out

On Friday 23 August 2013, Alexander Neundorf wrote: ... > Another nice thing of a standard variable would have been that those > packages could be made more easy available to non-cmake buildsystems. > Two years ago after Randa I added an option --find-package JPEG to cmake, > so you ca

Re: I'm out

On Thursday 22 August 2013, Kevin Ottens wrote: > Hello, > > On Thursday 22 August 2013 09:14:16 Stephen Kelly wrote: > > Mark wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:20 PM, Alexander Neundorf > > > > > > wrote: > > >> until recently I

CMake source incompatible changes

Hi, here: http://techbase.kde.org/Development/ECM_SourceIncompatChanges I tried to document all cmake source-incompatible changes in our buildsystem between KDE4 and KF5 (except FindKDE4Internal.cmake itself, since this is not done yet). Please try to keep that up-to-date and complete. I think i

Re: I'm out

On Wednesday 21 August 2013, Mark wrote: ... > Hi Alexander, > > I'm sorry to hear that! I hope you keep sticking around in KDE :) > As for the issues, why don't you and Stephen just find yourself a > quiet place on IRC and talk about it? Good news for Dominik: as I wrote, this is a break from KD

I'm out

Hi, until recently I thought I was still the maintainer of the buildsystem for KDE4 and also KF5, but I think the consensus on this list here is that Stephen has taken over this role. So I'll let him do that, and stay out of the way. I'll still have a look at KDE4 stuff, but for KF5 (including

  1   2   3   4   5   6   >