Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-23 Thread Ben Cooksley
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Martin Sandsmark wrote: > Distinguished Sirs and Madams, > > On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 09:08:11PM +0100, Martin Sandsmark wrote: >> Mangonel has just been moved to KDE Review. > > The KDE Review process is set to be two weeks, and if Mangonel calculator > isn't compl

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-22 Thread Martin Sandsmark
Distinguished Sirs and Madams, On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 09:08:11PM +0100, Martin Sandsmark wrote: > Mangonel has just been moved to KDE Review. The KDE Review process is set to be two weeks, and if Mangonel calculator isn't completely wrong, that period is now up. Since all the issues raised are

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-10 Thread Martin Sandsmark
On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 09:07:13PM +0200, Yuri Chornoivan wrote: > If there is no "Help" button and no desktop file, there is not much > sense in making docbooks. I agree. > I propose just add an item to UserBase launchers list [1] and some > tiny page based on README.md. I'll be sure to market

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Allen Winter
On Wednesday 09 January 2013 09:07:13 PM Yuri Chornoivan wrote: > написане Wed, 09 Jan 2013 19:35:49 +0200, Martin Sandsmark > : > > > On Tuesday 08 January 2013 19:30:45 Allen Winter wrote: > >> No docbook manual > > I guess I'll to contact the doc team for this? > > If there is no "Help" butt

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Yuri Chornoivan
написане Wed, 09 Jan 2013 19:35:49 +0200, Martin Sandsmark : On Tuesday 08 January 2013 19:30:45 Allen Winter wrote: No docbook manual I guess I'll to contact the doc team for this? If there is no "Help" button and no desktop file, there is not much sense in making docbooks. I propose

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Martin Sandsmark
On Wednesday 09 January 2013 19:45:27 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > There is one mail already on the list, so it is already spread. Okay, so the proverbial cat's out of the bag I guess, so I just added his email to the license headers. -- Martin Sandsmark KDE

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Martin Sandsmark
On Wednesday 09 January 2013 19:49:36 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > You should probably make it look like > i18nc("some context of what stuff is", "(%1)", application.type) > > Just in case someone needs to do something different with the parenthesis. Okay, fixed. Thanks :-) -- Martin Sandsmark K

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Albert Astals Cid
El Dimecres, 9 de gener de 2013, a les 01:09:28, Martin Sandsmark va escriure: > Hi, thanks for the review! > > On Tuesday 08 January 2013 23:12:01 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > Which is its intended destination extragear-something? > > Yes, sorry, I forgot to mention, it is destined for extragear

Re: Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Martin Gräßlin
On Wednesday 09 January 2013 18:35:49 Martin Sandsmark wrote: > On Tuesday 08 January 2013 19:30:45 Allen Winter wrote: > > No docbook manual > > I guess I'll to contact the doc team for this? > > > Do you want apidox generated? if so you also need a Mainpage.dox > > No need for that (yet, at le

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Martin Sandsmark
On Tuesday 08 January 2013 19:30:45 Allen Winter wrote: > No docbook manual I guess I'll to contact the doc team for this? > Do you want apidox generated? if so you also need a Mainpage.dox No need for that (yet, at least, we might want to make it plugin-based in the future). > Bart's email

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Martin Sandsmark
On Wednesday 09 January 2013 08:56:25 Jekyll Wu wrote: > If you plan to > use bugs.kde.org as the tracker, then you don't need to call > setBugAddress() at all. The default value just works. Fixed. > And don't forget to ask sysadmins to create a "mangonel" product on > bugs.kde.org :) Done.

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Jekyll Wu
On 2013年01月09日 08:09, Martin Sandsmark wrote: >Any reason not to use bugs.kde.org? Fixed. Hi, I see you made the change : -aboutData->setBugAddress(QByteArray("bugs.mango...@tarmack.eu")); +aboutData->setBugAddress(QByteArray("https://bugs.kde.org/";)); Hmm, that is not going to wo

Re: Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-09 Thread Bart Kroon
Hello List, On Tuesday 08 January 2013 23:12:01 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Dimarts, 8 de gener de 2013, a les 21:08:11, Martin Sandsmark va escriure: > > Dear Sirs and Madams, > > > > Mangonel has just been moved to KDE Review. > > > > Mangonel is a simple and lightweight application launche

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-08 Thread Allen Winter
On Tuesday 08 January 2013 09:08:11 PM Martin Sandsmark wrote: > Dear Sirs and Madams, > > Mangonel has just been moved to KDE Review. > No docbook manual Do you want apidox generated? if so you also need a Mainpage.dox Bart's email address is missing from the Copyright statements in many files

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-08 Thread Martin Sandsmark
Hi, thanks for the review! On Tuesday 08 January 2013 23:12:01 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > Which is its intended destination extragear-something? Yes, sorry, I forgot to mention, it is destined for extragear/base. > Any reason not to use bugs.kde.org? Fixed. > The i18n is quite broken, a simpl

Re: KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-08 Thread Albert Astals Cid
El Dimarts, 8 de gener de 2013, a les 21:08:11, Martin Sandsmark va escriure: > Dear Sirs and Madams, > > Mangonel has just been moved to KDE Review. > > Mangonel is a simple and lightweight application launcher in the vein of > Katapult from ye olde KDE 3 days, kind of reminiscent of the "task o

KDEREVIEW: Mangonel

2013-01-08 Thread Martin Sandsmark
Dear Sirs and Madams, Mangonel has just been moved to KDE Review. Mangonel is a simple and lightweight application launcher in the vein of Katapult from ye olde KDE 3 days, kind of reminiscent of the "task oriented" UI for krunner, but dropping the slow krunner architecture in favour of a simp