Moving KDevelop4 from trunk/KDE/ to trunk/extragear/sdk

Hi,

I already said this once or twice on this or that list, I'd
like to
develop KDevelop4 in extragear instead of trunk/KDE. This
has the
benefit of not needing to follow KDE-main's release schedule
(including
freezes), easier explanation of the differing version
numbers, and less
flaming from those that are annoyed by our "moving
around".

Also in KDE4 extragear apps will always be released with a
major kde
release, but the tagging has to be done by the original
authors, i.e.
they create a tag at some point in time before the next KDE
4.x.y
release and then KDE 4.x.y will include that version. 

The only downside: I and probably the rest of you as well,
have no idea
how translations are handled in that case...

No date as to when to do this move, its not urgent, I just
want to get
the discussion going 

One last thing: Is extragear/sdk the proper place or should
we ask to
get a extragear/devtools?

Andreas

PS: KDevPlatform would stay inside KDE/trunk as its used by
quanta in
kdewebdev...

-- 
You can do very well in speculation where land or anything
to do with dirt
is concerned.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On Monday 01 October 2007 13:25:26 Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I already said this once or twice on this or that list,
I'd like to
> develop KDevelop4 in extragear instead of trunk/KDE.
This has the
> benefit of not needing to follow KDE-main's release
schedule (including
> freezes), easier explanation of the differing version
numbers, and less
> flaming from those that are annoyed by our "moving
around".
You have my vote.

It will have the nice sideeffect of clearly showing that
KDevelop is not 
a "KDE application", it can also be used by gnome
and other desktops.


-- 
Amilcar Lucas
Webmaster
The KDevelop project

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On Monday 01 October 2007 14:25, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> The only downside: I and probably the rest of you as
well, have no idea
> how translations are handled in that case...

I think that moving kdevelop4 to extragear reduces KDevelop
visibility for 
users and lowers KDevelop's status inside KDE project (no
that it's too high 
now ;) ). I can't see any technical reason to not move, in
fact it would be 
more convenient for us. But I'm not sure that our
convenience is worth 
loosing status of "official KDE project".

> PS: KDevPlatform would stay inside KDE/trunk as its
used by quanta in
> kdewebdev...

Ok, and how that would help us. We still won't be able to
release the platform 
as frequently as we want and we still won't be able to break
KDE freezes for 
it. And platform is not just a collection of stable
interfaces, it's 
basically our application (shell) and several major plugins.
So IMHO we'd 
need to move all kdevplatform + kdevelop + kdewebdev
altogether from 
trunk/kde.

PS: these all release problems are not KDevelop problems but
i18n 
infrastructure problems so instead of moving our source I
think we should 
rather focus on i18n infrastructure.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

> On Monday 01 October 2007 13:25:26 Andreas Pakulat
wrote:
> It will have the nice sideeffect of clearly showing
that KDevelop is not
> a "KDE application", it can also be used by
gnome and other desktops.

I fail to see how the place inside the KDE subversion
repository will
affect the perception of an application.

For the rest, I agree with Alexander that this is not really
KDevelop's
problem, but an i18n issue, and that should be solved on
another level.

Andras


_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On 01.10.07 14:55:32, Alexander Dymo wrote:
> On Monday 01 October 2007 14:25, Andreas Pakulat
wrote:
> > The only downside: I and probably the rest of you
as well, have no idea
> > how translations are handled in that case...
> 
> I think that moving kdevelop4 to extragear reduces
KDevelop visibility for 
> users and lowers KDevelop's status inside KDE project
(no that it's too high 
> now ;) ). I can't see any technical reason to not move,
in fact it would be 
> more convenient for us. But I'm not sure that our
convenience is worth 
> loosing status of "official KDE project".

I completely disagree. Being in keg hasn't been a problem
for some of
the major KDE apps, like amarok or k3b. None of them
suffered from being
in k3b and keg in KDE4 is an _official_ part of the release,
we're going
to get a KDevelop release with any KDE 4.x release we want,
without any
extra overhead, except creating a tag before the KDE4.x
tagging.

I'm not talking about playground here!

> > PS: KDevPlatform would stay inside KDE/trunk as
its used by quanta in
> > kdewebdev...
> 
> Ok, and how that would help us. We still won't be able
to release the platform 
> as frequently as we want and we still won't be able to
break KDE freezes for 
> it. And platform is not just a collection of stable
interfaces, it's 
> basically our application (shell)

Shoudln't shell also keep BC? So thats just part of the
stable
interfaces as well.

> and several major plugins. So IMHO we'd need to move
all kdevplatform
> + kdevelop + kdewebdev altogether from trunk/kde.

Maybe thats even preferable, seeing that platform is still
young and may
have to mature more during the 4.x lifetime which means more
releases
that KDE does...

> PS: these all release problems are not KDevelop
problems but i18n 
> infrastructure problems so instead of moving our source
I think we should 
> rather focus on i18n infrastructure.

No, its not just i18n problems, its also problems of having
to follow a
schedule that we might not really fit into (or don't want to
follow).

Apart from that I don't see how i18n issues could be fixed,
except by
providing individual i18n packages for each module in
trunk/KDE. But
that option is AFAIK not going to happen (or at least thats
how I
understood Stephan).

Andreas

-- 
Many changes of mind and mood; do not hesitate too long.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On Monday 01 October 2007 15:48, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> I completely disagree. Being in keg hasn't been a
problem for some of
> the major KDE apps, like amarok or k3b. None of them
suffered from being
> in k3b and keg in KDE4 is an _official_ part of the
release, we're going
> to get a KDevelop release with any KDE 4.x release we
want, without any
> extra overhead, except creating a tag before the KDE4.x
tagging.

Yes, but those apps are much more popular than us.

> > Ok, and how that would help us. We still won't be
able to release the
> > platform as frequently as we want and we still
won't be able to break KDE
> > freezes for it. And platform is not just a
collection of stable
> > interfaces, it's basically our application
(shell)
>
> Shoudln't shell also keep BC? So thats just part of the
stable
> interfaces as well.

But plugins are not required to keep BC. Also shell and UI
library are good 
candidates for BC but message freeze breaking changes. So
there's a high 
chance of us wanting to release platform together with
KDevelop.

> > and several major plugins. So IMHO we'd need to
move all kdevplatform
> > + kdevelop + kdewebdev altogether from trunk/kde.
> Maybe thats even preferable, seeing that platform is
still young and may
> have to mature more during the 4.x lifetime which means
more releases
> that KDE does...

Andras, what would be the position of kdewebdev team then
about such move?

> > PS: these all release problems are not KDevelop
problems but i18n
> > infrastructure problems so instead of moving our
source I think we should
> > rather focus on i18n infrastructure.
>
> No, its not just i18n problems, its also problems of
having to follow a
> schedule that we might not really fit into (or don't
want to follow).

Well, since 3.0 we had 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 releases in time
with KDE. All them 
were quite good. So once 4.0 is done we IMHO can follow KDE
release schedule.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On 01.10.07 16:11:03, Alexander Dymo wrote:
> On Monday 01 October 2007 15:48, Andreas Pakulat
wrote:
> > I completely disagree. Being in keg hasn't been a
problem for some of
> > the major KDE apps, like amarok or k3b. None of
them suffered from being
> > in k3b and keg in KDE4 is an _official_ part of
the release, we're going
> > to get a KDevelop release with any KDE 4.x release
we want, without any
> > extra overhead, except creating a tag before the
KDE4.x tagging.
> 
> Yes, but those apps are much more popular than us.

And you think that they would be even more popular with
another place in
svn? I doubt that, IMHO its more about releasing together
with the rest
of KDE and we get that in keg as well. I mean few people
look at svn and
build from source, compared to those that just fetch the
package from
their distro and for those the place in svn doesn't matter
at all. I
really doubt distro's will drop kdevelop just because its
moved
elsewhere in svn and doesn't follow the kde version
numbering scheme.

Andreas

-- 
Tonight's the night: Sleep in a eucalyptus tree.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On Monday 01 October 2007, Alexander Dymo wrote:
> > > and several major plugins. So IMHO we'd need
to move all
> > > kdevplatform + kdevelop + kdewebdev
altogether from trunk/kde.
> >
> > Maybe thats even preferable, seeing that platform
is still young
> > and may have to mature more during the 4.x
lifetime which means
> > more releases that KDE does...
>
> Andras, what would be the position of kdewebdev team
then about such
> move?

As I fail to see why would it be better in extragear, I want
to keep at 
least the platform as a top level module.

Andras

-- 
Quanta Plus developer - http://quanta.kdewebdev.o
rg
K Desktop Environment - http://www.kde.org

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel