Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-20 Thread Marco Martin
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:42 PM, David Edmundson wrote: > > then we change our Q_PROPERTY in Plasma::Applet to go to a real > implementation > > system tray containment can then also implements the property. nnnuuuh :/ > Another possible technique is we export a new class which inherts Applet, >

Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-20 Thread David Edmundson
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Marco Martin wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:05 PM, David Edmundson > wrote: > > > > Actually adding a virtual is, but the design pattern of a virtual is > do-able > > in multiple other ways which are binary compatiable. > > *if* that's the approach we want (a

Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-20 Thread Marco Martin
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:05 PM, David Edmundson wrote: > > Actually adding a virtual is, but the design pattern of a virtual is do-able > in multiple other ways which are binary compatiable. > *if* that's the approach we want (and it's my preferred option) I'll make a > RR that does it. I know a

Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-20 Thread David Edmundson
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Marco Martin wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:37 PM, David Edmundson > wrote: > >> perhaps you are right, semantically they are two things, not sure what > >> could be used instead more "proper"(suggestions welcome), will think > >> more about it. > > > > > > L

Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-20 Thread Marco Martin
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:37 PM, David Edmundson wrote: > applet->pluginInfo().pluginName()) { > -applet->destroy(); > +QMetaObject::invokeMethod(applet, "cleanUpAndDelete"); > > (in all 3 cases) > > But it's equally messy, and has an issue that transient won't get set, so

Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-19 Thread Marco Martin
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:37 PM, David Edmundson wrote: >> perhaps you are right, semantically they are two things, not sure what >> could be used instead more "proper"(suggestions welcome), will think >> more about it. > > > Long term, a virtual hook for immutability? but even adding a new virt

Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-19 Thread David Edmundson
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Marco Martin wrote: > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 7:55 PM, David Edmundson > wrote: > > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365967 > > > > It's a bug in that weather applet that it's rendering outside the area it > > actually has - and that needs fixing anyway. > >

Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-19 Thread Marco Martin
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 7:55 PM, David Edmundson wrote: > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365967 > > It's a bug in that weather applet that it's rendering outside the area it > actually has - and that needs fixing anyway. > Introducing a new form factor won't solve that - in both cases you ha

Re: RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-19 Thread David Edmundson
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:09 PM, Marco Martin wrote: > Hi all, > I was looking at some systray-related bugs, such as > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365569 > and > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365967 > and it occurs to me they always have in common the same reason: even > if I trie

RFC: plasma-framework IndicatorArea formFactor()

2016-09-19 Thread Marco Martin
Hi all, I was looking at some systray-related bugs, such as https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365569 and https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365967 and it occurs to me they always have in common the same reason: even if I tried hard in the rewrite to make it less a "special case", it still is j