https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=358655
--- Comment #16 from Ken Standard <ad...@arrl.net> --- I am kind of taken back by some of your comments. Why would you need a test case for valid, commonly used, generic GNU C++ syntax? It seems unnecessary, redundant, and easily recreated. I see that umbrello is not as Qt aware as I had first believed. Also strange, since KDevelop, Qt SDK Framework, and even Mono use project descriptor files. This should not have been a surprise. My notes on the comment 8 post here was not, as you describe, "irritation", rather fascination that such a simplistic approach is taken to what should be intuitive. And, yes, a more descriptive choice would have been clearer. I think there is also still a question for projects where headers are in separate folders from source code and where headers and code may be grouped in folders rather than in a flat directory structure with all files together. Maybe a "recursive" option on the file selection? Yes, the import wizard is definitely broken. I discovered the workaround you describe just after my bug post. Maybe now we can change the status from "unconfirmed" to "confirmed" "working" or something? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
