<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd"><html><head><meta name="qrichtext" content="1" /><style type="text/css">p, li { white-space: pre-wrap; }</style></head><body style=" font-family:'Monospace'; font-size:10pt; font-weight:400; font-style:normal;">On Sunday 22 February 2009 19:32:47 Kevin Kofler wrote:<br>
> Eli Wapniarski wrote:<br>
> > It would then get packaged with kdemultimedia.<br>
><br>
> It would not. It comes from extragear-multimedia, which is not the same as<br>
> kdemultimedia!<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>> > There wouldn't be a separate package. Besides, KMplayer is now part of<br>
> > kdeextras.<br>
><br>
> A lot of stuff is part of extragear, that doesn't mean we're supposed to<br>
> package the version from extragear trunk. Extragear apps release on their<br>
> own cycle (they may request to be released together with KDE releases, but<br>
> they don't have to and many don't). In particular, extragear-multimedia<br>
> contains stuff like Amarok 2 which has its own releases and K3b whose KDE 4<br>
> port isn't ready to be packaged at all yet. And extragear apps are shipped<br>
> separately, not as whole modules.<br>
><br>
> Shipping a snapshot of extragear-multimedia as a monolithic package is a<br>
> horribly bad idea.<br>
><br>
> > The current version in the snapshots are stable version.<br>
><br>
> They're not. It's a snapshot from the current trunk. The Amarok and K3b<br>
> versions in that snapshot are very experimental. KMplayer may or may not be<br>
> stable in it, but the only way to be sure is to use an official release<br>
> blessed by KMplayer upstream, not a snapshot of a huge extragear directory<br>
> which happens to contain KMplayer. Again, extragear does not work like core<br>
> KDE modules (and even for those we wouldn't ship trunk snapshots, only<br>
> releases!).<br>
><br>
> > I've extracted and noticed that there is no Beta or RC candiate attached<br>
> > to the version number.<br>
><br>
> That doesn't mean it's not a beta or RC. Version numbers don't get updated<br>
> all the time, most of us developers only care about them being correct in<br>
> releases, in snapshots they can be anything (the previous release, the next<br>
> release, whatever).<br>
><br>
> > So, to keep up to date with whats happening with kdeextras I think it<br>
> > would be a good idea to use kdeextras.<br>
><br>
> No. You don't understand how extragear (which is how it's called,<br>
> not "kdeextras") works. The whole point of extragear is to have separate<br>
> apps with independent release cycles.<br>
><br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>They are independant however, a quck examination of several packages. kmldonkey as an examply is only released via extragear. If I mistyped and said kdeextras instead of kde extragear sorry.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>As far as stable extragear stuff is concerned take a look at<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/4.2.0/src/extragear<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>While they are all listed as seperate packages they are all under extragear.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>My experience with KMPlayer has been that the developer has always placed the correct version in the about box. And as I said, it maybe a good idea to email the guy and ask him which would be better.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>In any case, I will leave the packaging up to Rex's discretion. He usually makes the right choice.<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p>Eli<br>
<p style="-qt-paragraph-type:empty; margin-top:0px; margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px; margin-right:0px; -qt-block-indent:0; text-indent:0px; -qt-user-state:0;"><br></p><br />--
<br />This message has been scanned for viruses and
<br />dangerous content by
<a href="http://www.mailscanner.info/"><b>MailScanner</b></a>, and is
<br />believed to be clean.
</body></html>