On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 17:03 +1030, Andrew Mason wrote: > On Monday 12 December 2011 00:55:15 Gravis wrote: > > On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 15:22 +1030, Andrew Mason wrote: > > > Dependencies are only an issue if the application doesn't actually > > > 'depend' on them. If the application needs them to function correctly > > > then it's better to have lots of smaller packges which only include > > > that bit of functionality so that other applications don't also have to > > > carry around / maintain the code in their application. > > > > i agree and Konsole surely does not require things like KWebkit. > > So does konsole 'require' it to build ? If not isn't that a packaging issue ( > i.e distro ) rather than KDE specifically ? or does KWebkit provide some > functionality which you are saying Qt can provide also ?
my mistake, libkwebkit isnt a dependency... but libqt4-webkit is, which is strange in itself. > i don't see kwebkit there specifically ....my guess is that it's the kdebase- > runtime dep that would be bringing in kwebkit exactly. > I don't think anyone is against leaner KDE apps so long as you don't loose > the > ability to add functionality that you require. For example the 2 packages > probably wouldn't include dbus / notification libraries which at least for my > use case are required...other people may not need notifications with konsole > but they may want some other functionality. I think that may be challenging yeah, no notification classes (yet) but there is dbus in qt. there are a lot of basic and advanced things in Qt that KDE isnt using but using their own implementation or variant. this may be an issue of code being merged into Qt and the KDE code not being deprecated but i can't say for certain. -Gravis >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
