> On Jan. 26, 2016, 7:40 p.m., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm a bit afraid of all these ifndef. Do you think it would make sense to > > abstract out the KGlobalAccel usage? > > > > Otherwise, would it be possible to make KGlobalAccel useful (or just dumb) > > on Windows? > > Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > I would say: most applications do not need global accelerators, so making > kglobalaccel functional on windows is not really relevant, you wouldn't want > that dependency anyway because it doesn't add functionality. And building a > library and including it is always a burden, so I would say it's much better > to make it optional. > > Andre Heinecke wrote: > Hi, > > Abstracting it out would also be quite invasive imho. And from my > experience abstraced (optional) features are even harder to maintain then > ifdefs where you can easily see the codepath taken when something is not > available. While side effects through abstraction are harder to see when > hacking on code. > > As for the other point: > - GlobalAccel means that you basically need to have a keylogger on your > platform. I don't want that. There are system ways on Windows to create > global shortcuts already. Not as fine grained as KDE Actions but you could > use them to do command line calls. > - I don't really see this as a Windows only thing. KXmlGui provides very > useful features even without Global Shortcuts. And as for making KGlobalAccel > just dumb on Windows. While I think this would generally be a good idea I > expect that others (from Kde-Windows) who provide several KDE applications > and stuff like Systemsettings on Windows would disagree. > > We could add a dummy class in KXmlGui thats used if KGlobalAccel is not > available? This could avoid lots of ifdefs. But this would add a bit > maintenance cost when new API is used. While the IFDEFS make it quite > transparent to hackers that if you do thomething with GlobalAccel "please > guard it". > > Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > @boud, yes, I also thought about your RR, in fact I looked it up but > couldn't find it. > > Ok, maybe it's actually the way to make xmlgui viable to deploy. > > Take this as a +1 by me. > > Martin Gräßlin wrote: > Could we maybe continue the route I went with making sure that > kglobalaccel doesn't start? I'm quite concerned about the ifdefs. If there > are still situations where kglobalacceld is started without being needed, > let's fix that. Let's make it a proper runtime thing instead of an ifdef > messery nobody will check. > > I'm quite concerned about making the change optional as that's a route to > breakage with distros and as the maintainer of kglobalaccel I'm not looking > forward to those bug reports. > > Boudewijn Rempt wrote: > Well, part of the point, for me at least, is not having the dependency at > all. Any extra library, especially one that adds no functionality but is just > present, is a burden just like #idefs are a burden.
What can we do to make the burden not so hard on your side without adding the ifdefs? KGlobalaccel is basically a tier 1 - the higher number is due to the runtime part. Would it help to make the runtime part optional? Would it help to have a BC drop in replacement which just no-ops? By doing the change as suggested here new burden is created and moved to the shoulders of others. E.g. all Linux distributions which now have to be more careful with packaging. So we need to find the right balance. - Martin ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126895/#review91623 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Jan. 26, 2016, 7:25 p.m., Andre Heinecke wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126895/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Jan. 26, 2016, 7:25 p.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Frameworks. > > > Repository: kxmlgui > > > Description > ------- > > This is part of a three patch series that aims to allow a "leightweight" > build of KXmlGui without DBus and KService dependencies. I've added the > patches to: https://phabricator.kde.org/T1390 I'm not sure if I can create > reviews that depend on changes from another review, I'll try and if it does > not work I'll open one after another. > > Global shortcuts are a nice optional feature to have. But as they are not > strictly neccessary for the core functionality of KXmlGui, as I see it, and > pull in an extra dependency to DBus and need runtime support on the target > platform they should be optional. > > This (and the other changes) add lots of unloved ifdefs, I could understand > if thats disliked. But let me explain the background of this change: > > I'm currently updating Kleopatra in Gpg4win to a KDE Frameworks based build. > This is nice. Frameworks are awesome, I can just pick what I need and don't > have dependencies to lots of things that are actually not needed. > Then comes KXmlGui, adds 20 Framework dependencies, and I don't know what to > do. > I want: > - configureable "KDE Style" GUI > - configurable Shortcuts > - KDE Standardactions (e.g. Help / WhatsThis) > - kbugreport > - KDE Integration in an KDE Environment > > But I don't want: > - Global Shortcuts (we don't have kded so this won't work for us anyway) > - DBus (our dbus is directory scoped and there are no other applications > using dbus installed by us) > - KService dependency (System configuration has been troublesome in the past > on Windows and is not neccessary if we provide just a single installation) > > So these Patches are my way out of this Problem. Without the optional > packages KXmlGui provides what I want and does not depend on what I don't > want. > > > Diffs > ----- > > CMakeLists.txt 9d79619 > src/CMakeLists.txt 58f0c7a > src/config-xmlgui.h.cmake 07c882f > src/kactioncollection.cpp 9c45725 > src/kkeysequencewidget.cpp b2e2b6a > src/kshortcuteditwidget.cpp 670d031 > src/kshortcutseditor.cpp 99dfb3d > src/kshortcutseditoritem.cpp 461a90c > src/kxmlguifactory.cpp 2767e69 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126895/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Compiled with and without dependency. Tested Kleopatra against it. > Not yet tested on Windows, will do so in the next days. > > > Thanks, > > Andre Heinecke > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
