On 07/15/2014 11:17 AM, Syam Krishnan wrote:
On 07/15/2014 05:39 PM, Daniel Vrátil wrote:
> speaking with my KDE PIM developer hat on, I think it makes a lot
> sense to
> actually split the package per-app, so we would have
> kdepim-akonadiconsole (I'd actually prefer if this was not installed by
> default, so that people would not be tempted to play with it :P)
> kdepim-libs (libs shared by multiple PIM apps)
> kdepim-common (?) (shared executables, like incidenceeditor-ng, Akonadi
> agents, etc)
One suggestion (apologies in advance if I've not understood it
correctly). Why "kdepim-*" naming for applications?
It's a convention to highlight the originating module where the subpkg
comes from. We *usually* follow this in split kde packaging,
kde-baseapps being a recent exception. I think I'd prefer to follow
that here too, but I won't insist on it.
I think we had something like this for kate, okteta etc. which was
sometimes irritating since one had to yum search for "*kate*" to figure
out the package name for installation. Anyway, nowadays, its just kate
and okteta, and I'm liking it.
Indeed, we had kdesdk- prefix for these once, but that was prior to
upstream doing split tarballs for us.