Re: KDE apps in the Qt Showroom
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:44 PM, Mario Fux wrote: > Am Freitag, 06. Juni 2014, 18.43:04 schrieb Aleix Pol: > > Morning Aleix > > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Mario Fux wrote: > > > Good morning dear contributors > > > > > > There is today this blog post from Qt: > > > > > > > http://blog.qt.digia.com/blog/2014/06/06/qt-showroom-calling-all-applicat > > > ion- developers/ > > > > > > And I definitely think some KDE apps should be in this showroom! > > > > > > So please forward this message to other mailing lists if you think it > > > makes sense. > > > Can KDE Promo take care of this? I don't think any project would prefer > not > > to be there. > > Generally a good idea but as the KDE promo team is not very active atm (too > many people of the team are quite busy atm) there won't be much progress on > this from the KDE promo side I think. > > On the other hand. The KDE promo team searches for new people. Interested? > Here is your first task ;-). > > Best regards > Mario > > >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to > unsubscribe << > Yes, it can be a nice way to get people introduced. If they want to use any of my projects, I'll be happy to help with any needed information. Aleix >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
Re: Review Request 118439: Turn baloo's libraries into a framework
> On June 4, 2014, 2:53 p.m., Vishesh Handa wrote: > > I wasn't too keen on having separate library names, but it does make > > distros lives much easier. Go ahead! And thanks for taking care of this. I just checked and this patch didn't rename the libraries in most of the tests + pim. I've fixed it, and I'm committing it. - Vishesh --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118439/#review59205 --- On May 31, 2014, 11:59 a.m., Heiko Becker wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118439/ > --- > > (Updated May 31, 2014, 11:59 a.m.) > > > Review request for Baloo. > > > Repository: baloo > > > Description > --- > > This turns baloo's libraries into a framework to make it coinstallable with > its KDE4 counterpart. > > As I've said in my first review request > (https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118438/) I'm not exactly sure this is the > way you guys want to go, but I'd be willing to update my review request > accordingly if you have other plans to make it coinstallable. > > > Diffs > - > > BalooConfig.cmake.in d389bfd69def803b3bceb1a79ce4c97e4ea4803e > CMakeLists.txt fe6b24195eb39d9113004169bf119f4fe991e32b > src/core/CMakeLists.txt 844100f5e3ac9aebfb0d267f63742d63d2ad2965 > src/core/autotests/CMakeLists.txt d03b0a71848ea3a816d1d4c2ebcf1981e54ba710 > src/core/tests/CMakeLists.txt f505379c4b0da41c68e1945f3ae3b7ddccd57910 > src/file/lib/CMakeLists.txt 9bfafde198d5033bf1f1558aa7727d109b2c673d > src/file/lib/autotests/CMakeLists.txt > 0c20b65cf2302bdf1e39d9fc380fd371e699734e > src/xapian/CMakeLists.txt 5fcfd090ae479a8a79a37a3e6d0b6246d971a916 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118439/diff/ > > > Testing > --- > > cmake -DBALOO_LIBRARIES_ONLY:BOOL=TRUE .. > make > make install > > I've also built the frameworks branch of milou against it (needed a few > modifications). > > > Thanks, > > Heiko Becker > > >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
Re: Review Request 118439: Turn baloo's libraries into a framework
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118439/#review59783 --- This review has been submitted with commit b8c97e07f618ff7cb68a4156bdc68056650c598a by Vishesh Handa on behalf of Heiko Becker to branch frameworks. - Commit Hook On May 31, 2014, 11:59 a.m., Heiko Becker wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118439/ > --- > > (Updated May 31, 2014, 11:59 a.m.) > > > Review request for Baloo. > > > Repository: baloo > > > Description > --- > > This turns baloo's libraries into a framework to make it coinstallable with > its KDE4 counterpart. > > As I've said in my first review request > (https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118438/) I'm not exactly sure this is the > way you guys want to go, but I'd be willing to update my review request > accordingly if you have other plans to make it coinstallable. > > > Diffs > - > > BalooConfig.cmake.in d389bfd69def803b3bceb1a79ce4c97e4ea4803e > CMakeLists.txt fe6b24195eb39d9113004169bf119f4fe991e32b > src/core/CMakeLists.txt 844100f5e3ac9aebfb0d267f63742d63d2ad2965 > src/core/autotests/CMakeLists.txt d03b0a71848ea3a816d1d4c2ebcf1981e54ba710 > src/core/tests/CMakeLists.txt f505379c4b0da41c68e1945f3ae3b7ddccd57910 > src/file/lib/CMakeLists.txt 9bfafde198d5033bf1f1558aa7727d109b2c673d > src/file/lib/autotests/CMakeLists.txt > 0c20b65cf2302bdf1e39d9fc380fd371e699734e > src/xapian/CMakeLists.txt 5fcfd090ae479a8a79a37a3e6d0b6246d971a916 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118439/diff/ > > > Testing > --- > > cmake -DBALOO_LIBRARIES_ONLY:BOOL=TRUE .. > make > make install > > I've also built the frameworks branch of milou against it (needed a few > modifications). > > > Thanks, > > Heiko Becker > > >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
Re: Review Request 118439: Turn baloo's libraries into a framework
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118439/ --- (Updated June 11, 2014, 1:03 p.m.) Status -- This change has been marked as submitted. Review request for Baloo. Repository: baloo Description --- This turns baloo's libraries into a framework to make it coinstallable with its KDE4 counterpart. As I've said in my first review request (https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118438/) I'm not exactly sure this is the way you guys want to go, but I'd be willing to update my review request accordingly if you have other plans to make it coinstallable. Diffs - BalooConfig.cmake.in d389bfd69def803b3bceb1a79ce4c97e4ea4803e CMakeLists.txt fe6b24195eb39d9113004169bf119f4fe991e32b src/core/CMakeLists.txt 844100f5e3ac9aebfb0d267f63742d63d2ad2965 src/core/autotests/CMakeLists.txt d03b0a71848ea3a816d1d4c2ebcf1981e54ba710 src/core/tests/CMakeLists.txt f505379c4b0da41c68e1945f3ae3b7ddccd57910 src/file/lib/CMakeLists.txt 9bfafde198d5033bf1f1558aa7727d109b2c673d src/file/lib/autotests/CMakeLists.txt 0c20b65cf2302bdf1e39d9fc380fd371e699734e src/xapian/CMakeLists.txt 5fcfd090ae479a8a79a37a3e6d0b6246d971a916 Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118439/diff/ Testing --- cmake -DBALOO_LIBRARIES_ONLY:BOOL=TRUE .. make make install I've also built the frameworks branch of milou against it (needed a few modifications). Thanks, Heiko Becker >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
Re: Review Request 118438: Add an option to only build baloo's libraries
> On June 4, 2014, 2:55 p.m., Vishesh Handa wrote: > > I'm not too sure about this. I was planning on moving the runners, kcm and > > kioslaves out of the baloo repository and into plasma-desktop and > > plasma-workspace. This just leaves the executables, which IMO should > > overwrite the old ones, but that would be a problem, right? Well, splitting it out would work for us, too. So that leaves the binaries. If they shouldn't be renamed it would to nice to have a cmake option in order to decide if they should be build. That way we could provide packages with an option allowing the user to build and install the binaries for the version he wants (probably matching his version of Plasma workspaces). I'd be willing to adjust this patch to only make the building of binaries depending on a cmake option, if it's alright with you. - Heiko --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118438/#review59206 --- On May 31, 2014, 11:54 a.m., Heiko Becker wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118438/ > --- > > (Updated May 31, 2014, 11:54 a.m.) > > > Review request for Baloo. > > > Repository: baloo > > > Description > --- > > The intention behind this review request is to make it easier to turn baloo > into a framework and make it coinstallable with its KDE4 counterpart in a > second review request. > > That being said I'm not exactly sure this is the way you guys want to go, but > I'd be willing to update my review request accordingly if you have other > plans to make it coinstallable. > > > Diffs > - > > src/CMakeLists.txt de044025012ebcccb8a9c7293edfe045cc9b7856 > src/file/CMakeLists.txt 4f9fb9dd6b0e680a5f70cfaeb3986000cb192acd > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118438/diff/ > > > Testing > --- > > cmake -DBALOO_LIBRARIES_ONLY:BOOL=TRUE .. > make > make install > > I've also built the frameworks branch of milou against it (needed a few > modifications). > > > Thanks, > > Heiko Becker > > >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
Review Request 118670: Change kfilemetadata's naming scheme to match KF5 libraries
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118670/ --- Review request for Baloo and Vishesh Handa. Repository: kfilemetadata Description --- Submitting as an official review request, so progress can be properly tracked. As of now, libraries installed from the frameworks branch (based on KF5) collide with the kdelibs4 based libraries from master. Modifying the cmake files allows for parallel installation without too much effort while maintaining the capability to use either mater's or framework's version by finding the appropriate cmake file, thus making life much easier for distributions. Now one option would be to invent some different name to prevent the collisions, but instead we chose a different way: kfilemetadata, just as baloo's libraries, will be a framework at some future point. Then it is likely to use the same notation anyway. So why changing names several times without any real advantages? Therefore the patch changes kfilemetadata's framework branch to match KF5 terminology. The patch was rebased on current framework's head. Additionally, Heiko and I decided to squash our patches as they are trying to achieve the same goal. Diffs - CMakeLists.txt 5a9eefa KFileMetaDataConfig.cmake.in b4d1c93 autotests/CMakeLists.txt c657a70 src/CMakeLists.txt 82dbd5c src/extractors/CMakeLists.txt 0099c08 Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/118670/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Bernd Steinhauser >> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
StatusNotifier stand-alone implementation (help)
Hi,
I want to implement the StatusNotifier in qml for that I use
nemomobile dbus qml plugin
https://github.com/nemomobile/nemo-qml-plugin-dbus/
It is all working except the toolTip (maybe you know what it should
look like) see example below
The item id is hardcoded for the example.
DBusInterface {id:dbusInterface;
destination: "org.kde.StatusNotifierItem-28035-1"
path: "/StatusNotifierItem"
iface: "org.kde.StatusNotifierItem"
signalsEnabled: true
}
dbusInterface.getProperty("IconName") or getProperty for Id or title etc works.
I'm having issue with the format for the ToolTip
console.log(dbusInterface.getProperty("ToolTip")) results in
qml: QVariant(QDBusArgument)
Many thanks in advance!
Damian
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
