> On Aug. 11, 2011, 7:56 a.m., Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> > if i read this correctly, this means that the name of the package on the 
> > system needs to be the name of the dataengine. e.g. org.kde.foobar or 
> > whatever. is that going to be ok for packagers?
> > 
> > also, this work needs to shift to being written against the frameworks 
> > branch, and then only after libplasma2 has been merged into it. note that 
> > in libplasma2, there is no PackageMetadata class and the install package 
> > routine has moved into PackageStructure as well.

> if i read this correctly, this means that the name of the package on the 
> system needs to be the name of the dataengine. e.g. org.kde.foobar or
> whatever.

That depends on how the PackageKit backend code is implemented. For RPM/Yum, we 
use virtual Provides of the plasma4(dataengine-org.kde.foobar) or 
plasma4(dataengine-foobar) (depending on what the data engine actually uses as 
its name) form. Looking up the correct package to provide a given data engine 
is PackageKit's job.

> also, this work needs to shift to being written against the frameworks 
> branch, and then only after libplasma2 has been merged into it. note that
> in libplasma2, there is no PackageMetadata class and the install package 
> routine has moved into PackageStructure as well.

I can prepare a patch against libplasma2. I'm not sure I'll be able to test it 
at this time though.


- Kevin


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102291/#review5618
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Aug. 10, 2011, 10:10 p.m., Kevin Kofler wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102291/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Aug. 10, 2011, 10:10 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Plasma.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> This is another part of my GSoC 2011 work.
> 
> For script engines, the existing metadata (X-Plasma-API) is sufficient.
> 
> For data engines, we introduce a new metadata entry:
> X-Plasma-RequiredDataEngines. Third-party packages will have to add this entry
> to benefit from this feature at this time. Automatic support for scanning
> package source code on installation (at least for some languages) is planned,
> but the metadata entry is definitely the most efficient method.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   plasma/package.cpp 4c00d36 
>   plasma/packagemetadata.h b10f0e4 
>   plasma/packagemetadata.cpp 59163b2 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102291/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Verified that it compiles without errors and that it successfully prompts for 
> a missing Python script engine right after installing a Python widget (I used 
> Veromix for my test) through KHNS (not only when actually using it) on Fedora 
> 15. Also verified that there is no such prompt if plasma-scriptengine-python 
> is already installed.
> 
> (The patch is against master (4.8), but applies without changes to the 
> kdelibs 4.6.5 in Fedora 15, which is how I tested it.)
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kevin
> 
>

_______________________________________________
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel

Reply via email to