On Sunday 10 November 2013, David Faure wrote: > On Sunday 03 November 2013 14:05:32 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > > To build karchive itself, they would need cmake + tier0-kf5 + ECM > > Which is exactly what I want to avoid. > > You wrote "To build software using karchive with cmake, they still need > only cmake." but this requires karchive to be installed first. On a linux > distro, no problem. But on Windows, they will have to build karchive > themselves (unless we make binary packages, which I heavily doubt we will > do). So the problem is real. I do NOT want to have to tell people "install > 3 build- system components before you can even build this very simple > library".
I guess the 3 buildsystem components would be cmake, ecm and tier0 ? I understand that this sounds like a lot when starting from scratch. As I said in some other thread, I was hoping that ecm would become so common, especially since I wanted it to be not bound to KDE, that it would anyway already be on the machine of a developer who uses cmake. This would leave only the tier0 package to be installed for the average developer using cmake. There are two things I find a bit surprising here. In KF5 we go great lengths to split the C++ libraries quite fine granular, not only based on different dependencies, but also on their purpose. For cmake "libraries" this correctness is apparently not a valid argument for splitting. OTOH, splitting the cmake "library" into two is considered bad because requiring the developer to install one more package is bad, but in C++ we'll have a lot of separate frameworks, and somebody wanting to build a tier3 framework will be required to install a whole bunch of packages, and this is not seen as a problem (it's actually the point of the splitting). But it's ok. Alex _______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
