Jump to content

KDE Core/Platform 11/QtLibraryCollection: Difference between revisions

From KDE Community Wiki
Aseigo (talk | contribs)
Created page with '== immediate goal == * website with database of avialable libraries * command line tool == scope == * libraries * uses Qt * open source as defined by DFSG == out of scope == * ...'
 
Jlayt (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{warning|This page contains rough working notes from discussion sessions at Platform 11, the contents of which may not accurately reflect any decisions made.  Please do not infer anything from these notes, official summaries of the conclusions reached will be made available for discussion as soon as possible.}}
== immediate goal ==
== immediate goal ==
* website with database of avialable libraries
* website with database of avialable libraries

Latest revision as of 16:35, 6 June 2011

Warning

This page contains rough working notes from discussion sessions at Platform 11, the contents of which may not accurately reflect any decisions made. Please do not infer anything from these notes, official summaries of the conclusions reached will be made available for discussion as soon as possible.


immediate goal

  • website with database of avialable libraries
  • command line tool

scope

  • libraries
  • uses Qt
  • open source as defined by DFSG

out of scope

  • proprietary
  • no selling mechanism

audience

  • Qt developers
  • both open source and proprietary

long term possibility

  • built packages


host code?

Pro:

  • More reliable
    • don't have to rely on 3rd parties being online/available
    • no broken links

Cons:

  • Need to do legal
  • More bandwidth and disk

Decision: host downloads .. tarballs + meta file (investigate using DOAP for the latter)

desired features

  • Metadata editable in website:
    • Name
    • License
    • Homepage link
    • Documentation link
    • Build system
  • Use KDE Identity for log in
  • Add/remove/update
  • Search driven
  • "Most downloaded" list
  • Comments
  • User ratings (multi-question survey)
  • No approval process, but a "report problem" link*
  • Uploads go under vendor namespaces, e.g. KDE/solid