On Mittwoch, 24. August 2022 17:26:33 CEST Noah Davis wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 5:12 PM Milian Wolff <m...@milianw.de> wrote: > > Without any knowledge of your work on the QML port of Spectacle, I would > > also claim that there is bound to be a lot of generic work that should be > > possible to land directly in the main branch, no? You are probably > > splitting up the data representation and UI layer, which can happen > > early. Then you add a second UI implementation in tandem to the widget > > one, which can be opt-in until it's ready. Once all is done, you can > > remove the old widget UI. There's no need to wait a long time for all of > > this to hit the main branch and work only in a feature branch, no? > > The UI is already fairly well separated from the backend simply > because Spectacle already has a CLI. I simply went through a lot of > iterations over the past few months in collaboration with Marco while > trying to come up with the right UI/UX. The branch contains a lot of > new UI related code that uses Qt Quick/QML. It would be useful for me > to keep track of these changes so that if anything breaks in the > process, I can more easily figure out which change did it and ask > questions if I wasn't the one who made the change.
Right, as I said I only worked on assumptions in my statement above. What prevents you though from merging the partial state of the Qt Quick/QML UI into the main branch? If you say the code history as it is now is useful, it should be useful in the future too - and as such could be merged more regularly? You don't have to enable the new UI for now in the main branch? -- Milian Wolff m...@milianw.de http://milianw.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
