I think adding this massive amount of packages into kde-base/ like this leads to confusion when trying to get an overview there. When the packages are only named after their application name, I see two serious drawbacks: 1. All kind of sorting and assiciation to modules is lost. It is difficult to find and figure out the original modules (e.g. kdepim, or kdepim-meta) when so many other packages are lying around. If a mix of full modules and split packages is installed, the user doesn't see which module a package is belonging to and has to look closely for each package if it's already installed by a full module. 2. Unmasking a set of same-module packages is difficult. If you want to use masked ones, you either have to unmask all of kde-base/* or each of the desired packages. In my opinion, it would make much more sense to rename the split packages with putting the module name in front of it. That would be, for example, kdenetwork_kmail or kdebindings_korundum. That way, it's easy to distinguish the approximate functionality of packages at the first glance, and they are nicely ordered when displayed with an alphabetical sorting. They can be masked and unmasked by module name (with kde-base/kdenetwork_* ~x86) and they can be uninstalled at once (with emerge -C kde-base/kdenetwork*). I really think that these advantages outweigh the slight visual clutter of package names being twice as long. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce:
We're on the kde team. We _are_ the kde team. You don't need to cc us :-)
Oh. Sorry. I'm not into it that much, you know.
I would be interested in what the KDE team thinks about this proposal. (After all, I know that you already read it.) Could you please be so kind and make a short statement, or close the bug if you think that's nonsense? Although, I know you got many other things to do as well, so you don't need to be in a hurry.
I don't have a very strong opinion against this. I just have a premonition other people will come up with reasons why this is a Bad Thing. So I'd like first to hear the opinions of the other KDE team members, and even if they're for it, to run it through gentoo-dev.
I personally agree with the reporter, but I don't have a strong opinion one way or another. I also think that the language bindings from kdebindings should go into their respective dev-lang categories.
You have my vote. How about reconstructing the massive splittered kdeaddons package a bit?
I suggest that instead of renaming the package on a package basis, add new folder to the portage package tree named kdemultimeda-apps/ kdebase-apps/ and so forth. this would fullfill purpose #1 without causing confusion with package names. as for drawback 2 I have no real solution, however when I installed these split ebuilds someone had posted a 1 line script in a forumthread putting the entire contents of kde-base/* into package.keywords anyway I disagree with renaming packages to long names unless necessary, and this doesn't seem reason enough to me. now that you have my view of it I put my faith in you devs, I bet you are more appropiate to do that decision than I am ^-^
> I suggest that instead of renaming the package on a package basis, add new folder to the portage package tree named kdemultimeda-apps/ kdebase-apps/ and so forth. Yeah, I like that. It seems like a reasonable middle way. Nevertheless, I think the "apps" in here is superfluous, and the modules contain more than only apps, so let's just name the folders kde-base/, kde-multimedia/, and so forth. The only question would be where kdelibs will go, but I guess that's going to be kde-base then.
There won't be happening anything in this regard.
