Re: KDE Builder: request for review
[email protected] Sun, 21 Jul 2024 17:20:46 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.kde.devel.core |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, On 2024-07-15 21:50, [email protected] wrote: > Hi, > > On 2024-07-15 20:13, Andrew Shark wrote: >> You mean new python dependencies? I never added them. Oppositely, I >> reduce them. For example, I gladly got rid of the "promise" >> dependency. > > yes, with dependencies I meant Python libs and the Python version. > > There was some rather lengthy discussions before we arrived at the > current OK situation. > >> >> Regarding reviews, I am not against them. I just continue directly >> committing changes that do not influence on the behavior, such as for >> example, changes to follow pep8 rules and refactorings. > > There were incompatible changes in the last months and I would really > like to have a proper review process for larger changes in general. > > And I think it must be clear that the top priority must be to stay > compatible. If I write a howto now, I want that it still works in 2 > years. > > That doesn't mean there shall be no new features, just not breaking > changes. > > Like we do it with Frameworks and Co. or how CMake handles that. > > The build tool shall not require the user to fixup the config without > really good reasons. > > Greetings > Christoph > > (please keep the list in CC) any feedback on that? Greetings Christoph > >> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I think before we promote this more as 'the tool to use' it would >>>> be >>>> nice to >>>> get some proper review flow going to avoid we run again into >>>> incompatible changes. >>>> >>>> These got me now several times and if we promote this to be used >>>> and >>>> write howtos the >>>> goal must be in my eyes no further backward incompatible changes >>>> or >>>> large dependency >>>> increases without a real good reason. >>>> >>>> But that is just my viewpoint. >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> any feedback on that? >>> Thanks.