We currently have the following groups
* kde-software-development
* kf5-software-development
Are you meaning something different than those?

Usually when someone asks about doing qt development I tell them to install qt-creator. Does that not give them enough stuff?
I guess if we did a qt-development group, that would go on the top of the list for me.

kde-software-development

This is still KDE 4 stuff.

kf5-software-development

This is not visible in DNF.

Usually when someone asks about doing qt development I tell them to install qt-creator. Does that not give them enough stuff?

It does not.

I am going to try to help address the back log of comps issues, this issue is comps issue https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/issue/205.
I would like to know what the KDE SiG wants there before I begin making changes to actual comps files to address the grouping issues. Any and all suggestions for how you want grouping should be made here since I can at least have only two places to check on this topic. I look forward to helping get this item closed, it has been this way for 5 years.

    kf5-software-development
This is not visible in DNF

Does this mean there are packages missing for this dev stack?

No, the comps group is marked as not visible, so you can't see it in dnf grouplist.

@ngompa , Does it need to be visible? That seems a simple change to start, but how does it affect the already established tests there are?

What "established tests"?

I just assumed there would be some of the standard QA tests. I don't know if they test groups, etc..

Not that I'm aware of.

So QT has QT3, QT4, QT5, and now QT6. Gotta love Blackberry. Do we want to have devel groups for all the versions? as well as versionless?
There is KDE(4) I believe and KDE5 development too, so should these be groups? And then what to make default, in each, optional, etc...
Just to be clear, you can assign this to me if you want I am going to work through it, but couldn't take ownership.

So QT has QT3, QT4, QT5, and now QT6. Gotta love Blackberry. Do we want to have devel groups for all the versions? as well as versionless?
There is KDE(4) I believe and KDE5 development too, so should these be groups? And then what to make default, in each, optional, etc...
Just to be clear, you can assign this to me if you want I am going to work through it, but couldn't take ownership.

Is there some movement wrt the comps file on this front ? @ngompa @jakfrost

I'm asking as we had that subject a while ago on matrix wether it would be useful to make meta-packages or not and we ended up with @rdieter having removed the prior metapackages as they were misused as a quick and dirty way for BuildRequires.

However, with Plasma6 and Qt6 having documentation and qt creator at least by default is able to build a c++ Qt program out of the box now without any additions required that have to be manually installed, a solution on this front would be desireable....

We still need to get the comps groups done for this. This is probably a good week to get it done.

I've got some time today and wanted to take a stab at this, at least for the easy part, kf5-software-development. I'm going to say this is for F41. If we want to backport to F40, great, but let's start with F41.

kf5-software-development group is just qt-creator with several qt5- packages. Do we still want the kf5/qt5 stuff, or can we convert the whole thing to kf6-software-developement? I'm going to assume we convert the whole thing. I believe it would look like this.

  <group>
    <id>kf6-software-development</id>
    <_name>KDE Frameworks 6 Software Development</_name>
    <_description>Install these packages to develop applications using Qt6 and KDE Frameworks 6.</_description>
    <default>false</default>
    <uservisible>true</uservisible>
    <packagelist>
      <packagereq type="mandatory">cmake</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="mandatory">extra-cmake-modules</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="mandatory">qt-creator</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="default">qt6-qtdeclarative-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="default">qt6-qttools-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="default">qt6-qtwebengine-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="optional">qt6-qtconnectivity-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="optional">qt6-qtlocation-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="optional">qt6-qtmultimedia-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="optional">qt6-qtsensors-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="optional">qt6-qtserialport-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="optional">qt6-qtsvg-devel</packagereq>
      <packagereq type="optional">qt6-qtwayland-devel</packagereq>
    </packagelist>
  </group>

For F41, qt6+kf6 only, for F40, we should have both.

https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/pull-request/954

This doesn't completely finish this ticket, but at least one part is done.

I've taken a stab at kde-software-development, but I need people's opinions.

Keep
These are either KDE6 based, or have no KDE base at all

• audiocd-kio-devel
• cmake
• dolphin-plugins
• gambas3-runtime
• kapptemplate
• kate
• kcachegrind
• kde-dev-scripts
• kdesdk-kioslaves
• kdesdk-thumbnailers
• kiten-devel
• kpartloader
• kuiviewer
• libkcddb-devel
• libkcompactdisc-devel
• libkdegames-devel
• qt-creator

Maybe
These are KDE5 based. It's possible they are still transitioning to KDE6, but I don't know

• cantor-devel
• cervisia
• kdbg
• kdesvn
• kdevelop
• kompare
• okteta
• poxml
• rocs-devel
• umbrello

Drop
These are KDE4 or KDE3 based

• kdelibs3-devel
• kdelibs-devel
• kdelibs-webkit-devel
• kdepimlibs-devel
• kdewebdev-devel
• krazy2
• qt3-designer
• qt3-devel
• qt-devel
• qt-mobility-devel
• qtwebkit-devel

Please let me know about the Maybe packages. If nobody tells me, I'll drop them. Also, if there are packages people think should be in here but are missing, please let me know.

I'd say from the Maybe camp we should keep kdbg, kdevelop, and kompare. The rest we can drop.

What about renaming this "kde6-software-development" so it would match the "kf6-software-development" group name ?

Then we could have it in both F41 and F40 same as kf6-software-development ?

What about renaming this "kde6-software-development" so it would match the "kf6-software-development" group name ?

Then we could have it in both F41 and F40 same as kf6-software-development ?

Since we still have a few KDE5 based apps, I'll leave it as it is.

Here is a pull request for this change.

https://pagure.io/fedora-comps/pull-request/957

We have updated both kde-software-development and added kf6-software-development

Is this issue done?

At this point, I think so.