Re: Review Request 122680: kglobalaccel: Remove the runtime's KAboutData

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122680/#review76862 --- I think you have to bring back (un-delete) the Messages.sh now

Re: Review Request 122590: Guard kglobalaccel against QApplication

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122590/#review76860 --- Ship it! It's looking fine, assuming the auto tests still pas

Re: Review Request 122680: kglobalaccel: Remove the runtime's KAboutData

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122680/ --- (Updated March 2, 2015, 7:11 a.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks, Mar

Re: Review Request 122680: kglobalaccel: Remove the runtime's KAboutData

On March 2, 2015, 5:21 a.m., Jerome Leclanche wrote: > > Should we be using ::tr here instead of not translating at all? > > Jerome Leclanche wrote: > Consensus on IRC six days ago was that dropping translation altogether > was fine. > I can add some ::tr but it's arguable whether some

Re: Review Request 122680: kglobalaccel: Remove the runtime's KAboutData

On March 2, 2015, 4:21 a.m., Jerome Leclanche wrote: > > Should we be using ::tr here instead of not translating at all? Consensus on IRC six days ago was that dropping translation altogether was fine. I can add some ::tr but it's arguable whether some of those values should have been translate

Re: Review Request 122680: kglobalaccel: Remove the runtime's KAboutData

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122680/#review76855 --- src/runtime/main.cpp

Re: Review Request 122680: kglobalaccel: Remove the runtime's KAboutData

> On Feb. 23, 2015, 11:23 a.m., Martin Klapetek wrote: > > From the docs "Currently, the values set here are shown by the "About" box > > (see KAboutDialog), used by the bug report dialog (see KBugReport), and by > > the help shown on command line (see KAboutData::setupCommandLine())." > > > >

Re: Review Request 122680: kglobalaccel: Remove the runtime's KAboutData

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122680/ --- (Updated March 2, 2015, 3:52 a.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks, Mar

Re: KPeople part of KDE Frameworks

I would just like to point out that the review period of KPeople is over and all the associated moves are in order, are they not? What exactly is "enormously rushed" when the review period is over and moves are rightfully requested? Perhaps that should have been said in either of the "please review

Re: KPeople part of KDE Frameworks

Ben Cooksley ha scritto: > On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Albert Astals Cid wrote: >> Can you do it ASAP so that David can release it ASAP so it's released before >> i >> release KDE Applications Beta 1 at the mid/end of the week? > > I've now moved KPeople into frameworks. > For future moves

Re: KPeople part of KDE Frameworks

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > Can you do it ASAP so that David can release it ASAP so it's released before i > release KDE Applications Beta 1 at the mid/end of the week? I've now moved KPeople into frameworks. For future moves I must stress that moves take place wel

Re: Review Request 122576: Introduce KMoreTools

> On Feb. 16, 2015, 11:12 a.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > src/CMakeLists.txt, line 81 > > > > > > I don't think this class is enough reason to make KService depend on > > QtWidgets. I think so, too. Any othe

Re: KPeople part of KDE Frameworks

Can you do it ASAP so that David can release it ASAP so it's released before i release KDE Applications Beta 1 at the mid/end of the week? Cheers, Albert El Divendres, 27 de febrer de 2015, a les 13:25:18, Aleix Pol va escriure: > On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Aleix Pol wrote: > > Hi, > >

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121390/ --- (Updated March 1, 2015, 10:02 p.m.) Status -- This change has been d

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On Dec. 8, 2014, 3:07 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it also needs a runtime check: > > if (QX11Info::isPlat

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On 十二月 8, 2014, 9:07 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it also needs a runtime check: > > if (QX11Info::isPlatf

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On 十二月 8, 2014, 9:07 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it also needs a runtime check: > > if (QX11Info::isPlatf

Re: Review Request 122606: Fix startup of kssld5 dbus service

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122606/ --- (Updated March 1, 2015, 8:49 p.m.) Status -- This change has been ma

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On Dec. 8, 2014, 3:07 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it also needs a runtime check: > > if (QX11Info::isPlat

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On Dec. 8, 2014, 3:07 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it also needs a runtime check: > > if (QX11Info::isPlat

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On 十二月 8, 2014, 9:07 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it also needs a runtime check: > > if (QX11Info::isPlatf

Re: Review Request 122764: Adding missing licenses

> On March 1, 2015, 5:51 p.m., Michael Pyne wrote: > > I like the idea, but do we make it clear anywhere that > > COPYING-CMAKE-SCRIPTS applies to only the included CMake scripts, besides > > the filename? i.e. in a separate README or in the .cmake scripts > > themselves? If not I would recomm

Re: Review Request 122606: Fix startup of kssld5 dbus service

> On March 1, 2015, 7:09 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > Ah. kiod registers as kssld5, but if it's not running then this doesn't > > work indeed. > > > > We could install a .service file for kssld but ok, let's do this for now. > > My idea of making this independent from the process actually host

Re: Review Request 122606: Fix startup of kssld5 dbus service

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122606/#review76823 --- Ship it! Ah. kiod registers as kssld5, but if it's not runnin

Re: Review Request 122764: Adding missing licenses

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122764/#review76820 --- I like the idea, but do we make it clear anywhere that COPYING

Re: Review Request 122576: Introduce KMoreTools

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122576/ --- (Updated March 1, 2015, 2:28 p.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks, Dom

Re: Review Request 122755: Add testcases for KIO::del()

> On March 1, 2015, 2:34 a.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > autotests/deletejobtest.cpp, line 43 > > > > > > Would it be better to use the unicode escaping? This can look weird in > > some set ups? I also did t

Re: Review Request 122755: Add testcases for KIO::del()

> On Feb. 28, 2015, 7:24 p.m., Emmanuel Pescosta wrote: > > autotests/deldirtest.cpp, line 51 > > > > > > KJob::NoError instead of 0? We need a cast for that check. Maybe you can look at my solution? - Martin

Re: Review Request 122755: Add testcases for KIO::del()

> On March 1, 2015, 2:34 a.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > Looks good to me, can you push yourself? I can push it myself if someone decides whether that static_cast(KJob::NoError) is fine or if 0 should be hardcoded (like in my first patch). I am fine with both - so I'd like to stick to what

Re: Review Request 122755: Add testcases for KIO::del()

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122755/ --- (Updated March 1, 2015, 12:21 p.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks.

Re: Review Request 122576: Introduce KMoreTools

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122576/ --- (Updated March 1, 2015, 10:59 a.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks, Do

Re: Review Request 122754: Remove use of KI18N_MODULE_DIR.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122754/ --- (Updated March 1, 2015, 10:33 a.m.) Status -- This change has been m

Re: Review Request 122754: Remove use of KI18N_MODULE_DIR.

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122754/#review76794 --- Ship it! Checked also that _ki18n_pmap_compile_script still w