Re: End of 2016 update on PyKF5 bindings
Shaheed Haque <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.kde.devel.bindings |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAHAc2jdba0n6kcwo+BK2Bpt7EWbMBOL9Eo5emnmXFe7GUXcW3A@mail.gmail.com> |
Hi Steve, On 18 January 2017 at 23:38, Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > Shaheed Haque wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On 18 January 2017 at 21:44, Stephen Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Shaheed Haque wrote: >>> >>>> HI Steve, >>>> >>>> I closed two of the reviews based on testing KDE/master. That leaves >>>> only https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/129763/: this should be >>>> non-controversial as it removes a functional no-op which just gets ion >>>> the way of my stuff, so please take a look at it when you can. >>> >>> This doesn't look like a no-op to me. I'm also generally not in favor of >>> adding things to ECM which do not directly help the goal of getting >>> bindings into frameworks repos. >> >> If you look at how the CMake constructs ${hdr_filename} and >> ${hdr_file}, you'll see that they are redundant. > > Hi Shaheed, > > It is not uncommon in kde repos (eg kcoreaddons) to specify files in > subdirectories, yet expect that the filename without subdirectory is what is > used in the #include. I think that's what you're seeing as 'redundancy'. > I've extended the ECM test for this case. I don't know if your patch affects > it. I see (I handle that differently!) so I'll look for another way. Leave this with me for now. >> I plan to do the rebasing in two phases, mostly to cleanly separate >> the bulk stuff from your view. I'm making decent progress on the first >> phase. So far a couple things have come up, and I will discuss them >> with you in a separate thread so we can explore the way forward as >> they come up. > > Great. I hope the issues can be discussed in terms of adding more/better > bindings to repos. > > Thanks, > > Steve.