Hello, I continue to step by step porting plugins and protocols to KF5 and have several suggestions on the process. I think, most of things should be discussed with Pali, but anyone interested is welcomed to this discussion.
1. I found quite useful to port plugins in separate branches. This allows to separate changes belong to different plugins, review the necessary changes for a concrete plugin and simply concentrate better on the plugin under construction. So, the question is whether this approach is desired, given that I'll commit these branches to main repository (or maybe it should have as few branches as possible). 2. If (1) is fine, Pali, may I ask to synchronize Jabber protocol branch as soon as I create it (I'll post on this, again, if 1 would be decided OK) to get Jabber protocol compiled against KF5/Qt5? 3. This approach is also make it handy to review the changes necessary for certain plugin to be ported. In my opinion, this review won't take much time, as typically most of changes are kde-dev-scripts-guided or some usual things. Unfortunately, I don't know, how to push a whole branch to KDE reviewboard easily, but anyway, one could just look at the branch changes. Here's also my list of plugins and protocols yet to be ported: - groupwise - qq - winpopup - webpresence - skype - statistics - history2 Also history plugin and bonjour protocol is already ported, but I'd like to see the decision on (1) to know, how to push the code properly.
_______________________________________________ kopete-devel mailing list kopete-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kopete-devel
