On 08/29/2013 06:20 PM, Kevin Ottens wrote: > Hello, > > On Wednesday 28 August 2013 20:26:45 Albert Astals Cid wrote: >> If you bundle lots of stuff in the tarball you may end up "wrongly" >> increasing your dependencies and people won't use the framework because "it >> depends on QtNetwork" or some other stuff that it's only used in >> kwalletmanager. >> >> Please let's not bundle stuff just because it's easier when there's a lot of >> people unbundleing stuff because it's better. > > I agree with your statement above in general. But in that particular case for > some of the frameworks we tend to ship the mandatory runtime bits with them. > That would be the case for kwalletd here, not for kwalletmanager though. > > And it's likely kwalletd would even become optionally built if I'm not > mistaken with secret service supposed to appear at some point.
In fact, I think that'll be better to implement secret service API in kwalletd. But I'm still thinking about it. kwalletd serves well a lot of people, and it only need some additions. For exemple, I plan adding a dedicated PAM module. That would be a nice addition to the GPG backend I already added (though, not yet merged). And kwalletd is simpler to debug, let aparart those dreaded nested loops problems it encounters on some set-ups. But I'm also working on that. Regards,
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel