[08:09] -queuebot:#kubuntu-devel- Builds: Kubuntu Desktop amd64 [Mantic Daily] has been updated (20230522)
[13:07] <BluesKaj> Hi all
[13:09] <ahoneybun[m]> Heyo BluesKaj 
[13:11] <BluesKaj> hey ahoneybun[m]
[15:19] <santa_> good afternoon everybody
[15:21] <santa_> RikMills: today (or soon), if you have time and you are in the mood I would like to review/comment a few things about packaging libraries with you
[15:22] <santa_> it's relevant for the things I will be doing with kdepim from gear 21.04
[15:22] <santa_> so it would be nice if we are both on the same page
[15:27] <santa_> also (if you haven't already) I would recommend you to have a look into:
[15:27] <santa_> - https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/advanced.en.html
[15:27] <santa_> - https://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer/column/libpkg-guide/libpkg-guide.html
[15:29] <santa_> - debian policy 8.2: https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html#shared-library-support-files
[15:29] <santa_> "If your package contains files whose names do not change with each change in the library shared object version, you must not put them in the shared library package. Otherwise, several versions of the shared library cannot be installed at the same time without filename clashes, making upgrades and transitions unnecessarily difficult."
[15:31] <santa_> ↑ most of the kde libraries as they are packaged in debian, are an OUTRIGHT VIOLATION OF A DEBIAN <<MUST>> POLICY
[15:31] <santa_> (and excuse me for the caps lock, I just wanted to emphasize that part)
[18:13] <valorie> santa_: have you discussed this issue with the kde libs devels?
[18:13] <santa_> valorie: nope, the things are in the _packaging_ side
[18:13] <valorie> I would assume that most major distros have the same issue
[18:14] <valorie> I know that naming is a BIG deal
[18:14] <valorie> for the reason you state
[18:14] <santa_> it seems specific to the *.deb world to me, but even if they do, it's on the packaging side
[18:15] <santa_> TL;DR -> most of the kde libraries are not properly packaged in debian/ubuntu/neon
[18:15] <valorie> got it
[18:16] <santa_> back in the days I tried to stop this, everybody dismissed the thing:
[18:16] <santa_> 1. neon didn't exist by then
[18:16] <valorie> what does the neon team have to say about it?
[18:16] <valorie> I mean, they often package first
[18:16] <santa_> 2. kubuntu people insisted it was not a problem
[18:16] <santa_> 3. debian people would reject ad-hominem anything I say
[18:17] <valorie> <--- not a packager
[18:17] <santa_> valorie: that's the people of 2.
[18:17] <valorie> yes, and years more experience by now
[18:17] <santa_> and even if they fix it in neon, debian merges are going to be a problem
[18:19] <valorie> when I thought about learning to package just for the experience, the naming is what made me say, nope
[18:19] <valorie> it's complicated
[18:19] <santa_> it's not :P
[18:19] <valorie> lol
[18:20] <valorie> which is why you do what you do, and I don't!
[18:20] <valorie> lol
[18:20]  * valorie must prepare for a meeting now
[18:20] <valorie> thank YOU for what you do -- analysis at a deeper level is always worthwhile
[18:23] <santa_> thank you as well :)
[18:36] <mmikowski> santa_ I have some insight  with KDE
[18:37] <mmikowski> is this a place where I might be able to help?
[18:37] <mmikowski> We are a KDE patron, so that might help
[18:38] <santa_> mmikowski: thank you very much, but no :)
[18:38] <santa_> like I said it's a packaging drama
[18:39] <mmikowski> I didn't get all of the details, but I have spoken recently with Nate about packaging.
[18:39] <santa_> Nate is not involved in packaging afaik
[18:41] <mmikowski> not directly, although he spoke briefly about neon packaging in our last conversation. I did too, because there are issues with QT libs and KDE frequently requiring the latest along with patches (as I expect you are very aware).
[18:43] <mmikowski> heck, you and Rik are the folks dealing directly with those issues. But in any event, if I can help, just let me know.
[18:46] <santa_> yeah, thanks a lot
[18:55] <mmikowski> santa_: You're welcome.