pkg kde talk - Jan 2008 - How to best maintain libqt4-ruby (and libsmokeqt4) once KDE4 is here

Hello, Vincent.

I was looking today at the kdebindings module of KDE4, and I noticed it
not only ships Ruby bindings for KDE (Korundum), but also to Qt, which
you maintain at the moment in a separate source package (libqt4-ruby).

From what I''ve seen, these bindings are all maintained in
KDE''s SVN
repository, and releases to Rubyforge are made periodically. How do you
think we''d best proceed? In particular, let''s address these
points:

  1. once kdelibs from KDE4 enter unstable, would you still like
     (hopefully!) to continue to maintain libqt4-ruby? If so, would you
     be willing to maintain it from a kdebindings package (we''d give
you
     commit access to the pkg-kde repository), or would you rather
     continue to maintain it in a separate source package?

  2. would you have any interest in maintaining Korundum, the Ruby *KDE*
     bindings? Again, either from the kdebindings package, or from a
     separate source package (belonging eg. to pkg-ruby-extras). I ask
     because the pkg-kde team is already overloaded, and we know that a
     single interested maintainer would do best than ourselves.

  3. on the other hand, though, we feel that libsmokeqt4 should be
     maintained from the kdebindings source package, since that''s its
     origin, and (if I''m not mistaken) other bindings can need it (in
     other words, it''s only bundled in the qt4-qtruby tarball for
     convenience, ain''t it so?) So, would you agree that we make
     kdebindings gains the libsmokeqt4-* packages once KDE4 starts
     entering unstable?

Thanks in advance!

-- 
Adeodato Sim?                                     dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer                                  adeodato at debian.org
 
                                Listening to: Los Planetas - Desaparecer

Hello,

Adeodato Sim? wrote:
> I was looking today at the kdebindings module of KDE4, and I noticed it
> not only ships Ruby bindings for KDE (Korundum), but also to Qt, which
> you maintain at the moment in a separate source package (libqt4-ruby).
> 
> From what I''ve seen, these bindings are all maintained in
KDE''s SVN
> repository, and releases to Rubyforge are made periodically. How do you
> think we''d best proceed? In particular, let''s address
these points:
> 
>   1. once kdelibs from KDE4 enter unstable, would you still like
>      (hopefully!) to continue to maintain libqt4-ruby? If so, would you
>      be willing to maintain it from a kdebindings package (we''d
give you
>      commit access to the pkg-kde repository), or would you rather
>      continue to maintain it in a separate source package?
  I think the best would be to maintain from the kdebindings package.
I''ll be glad to do it, but I''ll probably need some help in
doing so too
(not too much, though). I''ve taken to heart to keep libqt4-ruby in good
shape so far (and it is relatively tricky, with all the FTBS on hppa)
and I intend to go on. I guess maintaining all the bindings at the same
time should hardly be more work.
>   2. would you have any interest in maintaining Korundum, the Ruby *KDE*
>      bindings? Again, either from the kdebindings package, or from a
>      separate source package (belonging eg. to pkg-ruby-extras). I ask
>      because the pkg-kde team is already overloaded, and we know that a
>      single interested maintainer would do best than ourselves.
  As the main maintainer of a team-backed package, that should be fine,
that is, if I can rely on the team from time to time (especially for
advice on bits I don''t know about, since I do not use KDE at all).
>   3. on the other hand, though, we feel that libsmokeqt4 should be
>      maintained from the kdebindings source package, since that''s
its
>      origin, and (if I''m not mistaken) other bindings can need it
(in
>      other words, it''s only bundled in the qt4-qtruby tarball for
>      convenience, ain''t it so?) So, would you agree that we make
>      kdebindings gains the libsmokeqt4-* packages once KDE4 starts
>      entering unstable ?
  By the way, when is it planned that KDE4 enters unstable ? I bet you
want it out for lenny, don''t you ?

  Sorry for having taken quite some time to answer.

  Cheers,

	Vincent


-- 
Vincent Fourmond, Debian Developer
http://vince-debian.blogspot.com/
-- pretty boring signature, isn''t it ?