Alexander Neundorf wrote: >> > Now that it seems the shared-install-dirs feature can be removed, this >> > could be good enough. >> > It would imply that e-c-m will be updated relatively often >> >> Why would it need to be updated relatively often? Why does the removal of >> the shared-install-dirs feature imply that? > > The removal (or not-even-creation) of a KF5-cmake package implies that. > This would have been the place where KDE-buildsystem stuff would have been > put, e.g. the list of known libraries which belong to KDE frameworks. > If we don't have such a package, it probably has to be in e-c-m.
Right. > >> > and that the >> > kde-modules/ dir in e-c-m will indeed be quite KDE-ish. >> >> So, are you dropping the idea of a separate dependency which everything >> depends on? > > Yes, what I proposed does not have such a separate dependency, has an > almost as good grouping, at the cost of bringing more KDE stuff into > e-c-m. Right. I'm sure that won't be a problem. Thanks, Steve. _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
