On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 12:28 PM, Martin Graesslin wrote:
> On Monday 23 December 2013 10:36:22 Alex Merry wrote:
> > Oh, and the versioning that we get from a kf5 prefix could prove to be
> > useful when we transition to KF6.
> or means additional porting effort (though that can be sed'ed)
>
We'
On Monday 23 December 2013 10:36:22 Alex Merry wrote:
> On 23/12/13 01:42, Alex Merry wrote:
> > On 23/12/13 01:27, Aleix Pol wrote:
> >> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Alex Merry >>
> >> <mailto:k...@randomguy3.me.uk>> wrote:
> >> Curren
On 23/12/13 01:42, Alex Merry wrote:
> On 23/12/13 01:27, Aleix Pol wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Alex Merry > <mailto:k...@randomguy3.me.uk>> wrote:
>>
>> Currently, we are not consistent about CMake macro naming in the
>>
On 23/12/13 01:27, Aleix Pol wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Alex Merry <mailto:k...@randomguy3.me.uk>> wrote:
>
> Currently, we are not consistent about CMake macro naming in the
> frameworks. KAuth, for example, has kauth_install_actions, while
>
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 1:17 AM, Alex Merry wrote:
> Currently, we are not consistent about CMake macro naming in the
> frameworks. KAuth, for example, has kauth_install_actions, while
> kdesignerplugin has kf5designerplugin_add_widget_files.
>
> How do we want our macros pre
Currently, we are not consistent about CMake macro naming in the
frameworks. KAuth, for example, has kauth_install_actions, while
kdesignerplugin has kf5designerplugin_add_widget_files.
How do we want our macros prefixed?
Alex
___
Kde-frameworks-devel