Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, >> Boudewijn Rempt hat am 23. Oktober 2015 um 19:46 >> geschrieben: >> For Krita, we decided ages ago to simply open a browser on the userbase >> manual of Krita. Yes, it is conceivable that there are people who use >> Krita without internet access who still need help,

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Am 26.10.2015 um 10:33 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: > Hi, > >>> Boudewijn Rempt hat am 23. Oktober 2015 um 19:46 >>> geschrieben: >>> For Krita, we decided ages ago to simply open a browser on the userbase >>> manual of Krita. Yes, it is conceivable that there are people who use

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Monday 26 of October 2015 11:50:10 Ralf Habacker wrote: > > BTW: You mentioned the url > https://docs.kde.org/stable5/en/applications/kate/index.html in an earlier > email to access online help. khelpcenter determine the currently selected > language by itself and loads the language related

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 10:33 AM, Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Hi, > >>> Boudewijn Rempt hat am 23. Oktober 2015 um 19:46 >>> geschrieben: >>> For Krita, we decided ages ago to simply open a browser on the userbase >>> manual of Krita. Yes, it is

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

> Boudewijn Rempt hat am 23. Oktober 2015 um 19:46 > geschrieben: > For Krita, we decided ages ago to simply open a browser on the userbase > manual of Krita. Yes, it is conceivable that there are people who use > Krita without internet access who still need help, it's just

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hello, On Wednesday 21 October 2015 22:22:54 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > On Wednesday 21 October 2015 21:06:02 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > My concern there is more the fact that this kind of "short term" or > > "temporary" solutions tend to become permanent. As long as it is causing > > pain

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hello, On Friday 23 October 2015 16:35:36 Luigi Toscano wrote: > On Wednesday 21 of October 2015 20:09:33 Kevin Ottens wrote: > > And then, three areas of efforts which we are missing right now in > > Frameworks: - systematically try to reduce the tier and type of our > > frameworks (the maturity

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On 23 October 2015 at 16:18, Luigi Toscano wrote: > On Friday 23 of October 2015 10:31:36 Christoph Cullmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> > Am 21.10.2015 um 12:41 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: >> >> The last time I build umbrello with kf5 (version 5.11) dbus was required >> >> to

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > On Fri, 23 Oct 2015, Jaroslaw Staniek wrote: > >> Actually let's look as a popular ported standalone app: GTK/GNOME's >> help-browser that GIMP uses on Windows is the same as on Linux but I >> don't see it using dbus (but still webkitgtk is used). Moreover if >> someone caring for UX reads

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Friday 23 of October 2015 10:31:36 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Hi, > > > Am 21.10.2015 um 12:41 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: > >> The last time I build umbrello with kf5 (version 5.11) dbus was required > >> to run khelpcenter and open/save file dialogs and for remote control. > >>

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Friday 23 of October 2015 16:32:12 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Hi, > > > On Friday 23 of October 2015 10:31:36 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> > Am 21.10.2015 um 12:41 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: > >> >> The last time I build umbrello with kf5 (version 5.11) dbus was > >> >>

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > On Friday 23 of October 2015 16:32:12 Christoph Cullmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> > On Friday 23 of October 2015 10:31:36 Christoph Cullmann wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> > Am 21.10.2015 um 12:41 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: >> >> >> The last time I build umbrello with kf5 (version 5.11) dbus

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > On Friday 23 of October 2015 10:31:36 Christoph Cullmann wrote: >> Hi, >> >> > Am 21.10.2015 um 12:41 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: >> >> The last time I build umbrello with kf5 (version 5.11) dbus was required >> >> to run khelpcenter and open/save file dialogs and for remote control. >> >>

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday 21 of October 2015 20:09:33 Kevin Ottens wrote: > > And then, three areas of efforts which we are missing right now in > Frameworks: - systematically try to reduce the tier and type of our > frameworks (the maturity direction I was talking about); Do you mean that a Framework is

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > Am 21.10.2015 um 12:41 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: >> >> The last time I build umbrello with kf5 (version 5.11) dbus was required >> to run khelpcenter and open/save file dialogs and for remote control. >>

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Thursday October 22 2015 18:48:30 Marko Käning wrote: > have you followed the discussion with Qt's developers regarding the QSP patch > [1]? > If not, I advise you to do a little reading there! > Qt won’t ever support such an approach, i.e. one would have to patch it, if > KDE itself doesn’t

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > Am 21.10.2015 um 01:19 schrieb Aleix Pol: >> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Ralf Habacker wrote: Christoph Cullmann hat am 20. Oktober 2015 um 16:49 geschrieben: That works only, if the applications bundle their ui files in

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi René, On 22 Oct 2015, at 19:24 , René J.V. Bertin wrote: > Not exactly, no. The patch was rejected in the presented form, but we were > invited to file a bug report (I think it's > https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-44473). Here we (me, IIRC) managed to > make the

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Thanks René and Jeremy, On 22 Oct 2015, at 22:43 , Jeremy Whiting wrote: > ...It sounds like a good solution for embedding a copy of Qt next > to each application for windows use (and maybe for osx use too if > resources don't make it completely unneccessary), but not for the

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Thursday October 22 2015 22:05:59 Marko Käning wrote: > > https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-44473?focusedCommentId=272971=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-272971) > > Because the proposal supports environment variables too, I guess this > > would

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Yeah, if we go that direction on mac it would be fine for bundled Qt, but not for shared Qt. It would make all applications that use qt5-mac or qt5-kde or whatnot use linuxy paths or not. It's a runtime switch, so not very helpful if you've installed stuff to linuxy paths and then let the user

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday October 21 2015 13:08:46 Dominik Haumann wrote: > In Windows, such a package manager does not exist. KDE tried to create > such a package manager through the emerge/KDE Windows installer, but > this is non-standard [on Windows] and simply not what users want. That's not entirely

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Am 21.10.2015 um 01:19 schrieb Aleix Pol: > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Ralf Habacker wrote: >>> Christoph Cullmann hat am 20. Oktober 2015 um 16:49 >>> geschrieben: >>> That works only, if the applications bundle their ui files in resources, >>> too,

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Thu, 22 Oct 2015, Christoph Cullmann wrote: If such an approach seems reasonable, we could have some helper for this in a framework. Perhaps the "breeze" framework could even just provide such an rcc and a little lib to load it that can be used for people creating bundles/installers.

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Impressive! And cool to see another project using the cmake externals approach, I can copy a lot of it for Krita 3, I think. How are you handling icons? Bundling the breeze theme, or putting the icons in resource files? -- Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.org, http://www.valdyas.org On Thu,

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Thu, 22 Oct 2015, Christoph Cullmann wrote: Hi, Impressive! And cool to see another project using the cmake externals approach, I can copy a lot of it for Krita 3, I think. How are you handling icons? Bundling the breeze theme, or putting the icons in resource files? as I was lazy, I just

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > Impressive! And cool to see another project using the cmake externals > approach, I can copy a lot of it for Krita 3, I think. How are you > handling icons? Bundling the breeze theme, or putting the icons in resource > files? as I was lazy, I just compiled complete breeze into a binary rcc

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > On Thu, 22 Oct 2015, Christoph Cullmann wrote: > >> Hi, >> >>> Impressive! And cool to see another project using the cmake externals >>> approach, I can copy a lot of it for Krita 3, I think. How are you >>> handling icons? Bundling the breeze theme, or putting the icons in resource >>>

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi Ralf, On 22 Oct 2015, at 08:35 , Ralf Habacker wrote: > umbrello for example depends on about 50 other libraries and packages > https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/home:rhabacker:branches:windows:mingw:win32:KF511. > Not patching Qt requires to repack every single

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Alexander Neundorf wrote: Maybe Qt could be shared ? No, no, no. Absolutely not. Every application on Windows should bring its own dependencies and all of them. Any attempt at anything else is a misguided deviation from the platform's way of working and will bring

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > Hello, > > On Wednesday 21 October 2015 09:26:35 Christoph Cullmann wrote: >> Hi, >> ;=) Yeah, fluffy, e.g. I would call dbus "non-reasonable", as it requires >> some daemon to be running, even if we would have per application install >> daemons. I would call stuff reasonable that is

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, >> What's important to realize is that deployment under Windows works different > >> to deployment under Linux: In Linux, you have the package manager which > >> automatically drags in all correct dependencies and you are fine. > >> > >> In Windows, such a package manager does not exist.

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday October 21 2015 22:12:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Maybe, but actually, even with the most dumb application bundle I have > created ATM > all stuff together is around 50 MB compressed and installed 125 MB. > > This includes a more or less complete Qt (with webkit, some debug

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hello, On Wednesday 21 October 2015 21:06:02 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > >> > If it is linked to runtime dependencies, I think you ought to not only > >> > look at the Tier but also the Type. Only frameworks of the "functional" > >> > type have no such dependencies. > >> > >> Perhaps. > > > >

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 13:08:46 Dominik Haumann wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > I think that is more or less what we had in the past with the "kdewin" > > installer, that is like the cygwin installer pulling in all stuff you >

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 22:48:52 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Hi, > > > On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 22:12:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > > > ... > > > >> And the big benefit: One can install my alpha crashy something quality > >> Kate > >> > >> bundle with its Qt something version

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 22:12:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote: ... > And the big benefit: One can install my alpha crashy something quality Kate > bundle with its Qt something version and some imaginary Krita bundle that > is installed in parallel will NOT be borked! are you more or less

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 22:12:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > ... > >> And the big benefit: One can install my alpha crashy something quality Kate > >> bundle with its Qt something version and some imaginary Krita bundle that > >> is installed in parallel will NOT be borked! >

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hello, On Wednesday 21 October 2015 08:13:42 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > > On Tuesday 20 October 2015 19:49:54 Aleix Pol wrote: > >> 3) non-existing stuff? really? Let's rephrase it as: "Frameworks will > >> only be advertised as available on a platform if they are just require > >> Qt or other

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > Hello, > > On Wednesday 21 October 2015 08:13:42 Christoph Cullmann wrote: >> > On Tuesday 20 October 2015 19:49:54 Aleix Pol wrote: >> >> 3) non-existing stuff? really? Let's rephrase it as: "Frameworks will >> >> only be advertised as available on a platform if they are just require >>

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

> Christoph Cullmann hat am 20. Oktober 2015 um 16:49 > geschrieben: > That works only, if the applications bundle their ui files in resources, too, > otherwise, they just won't be found > and the applications break, unless you patch again Qt to look in non-standard >

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

I think that is more or less what we had in the past with the "kdewin" installer, that is like the cygwin installer pulling in all stuff you need and a set of applications in some common prefix. I am not sure that was such a success, compared to what e.g. Krita, Marble, Digikam and others do:

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Am 21.10.2015 um 08:14 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: > Hi, > >>> Aleix Pol hat am 20. Oktober 2015 um 19:49 geschrieben: >>> Regarding dbus especifically, I see the problem in 2). You can bundle >>> it, but then if it's already ran by another process the other one will >>> have

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > Am 21.10.2015 um 08:14 schrieb Christoph Cullmann: >> Hi, >> Aleix Pol hat am 20. Oktober 2015 um 19:49 geschrieben: Regarding dbus especifically, I see the problem in 2). You can bundle it, but then if it's already ran by another process the other one will

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Christoph Cullmann wrote: > I think that is more or less what we had in the past with the "kdewin" > installer, > that is like the cygwin installer pulling in all stuff you need and a set of > applications > in some common prefix. > > I am

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, >> Aleix Pol hat am 20. Oktober 2015 um 19:49 geschrieben: >> Regarding dbus especifically, I see the problem in 2). You can bundle >> it, but then if it's already ran by another process the other one will >> have to be used, which is where the dbus mess starts. > There is

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > Hello, > > On Tuesday 20 October 2015 19:49:54 Aleix Pol wrote: >> 3) non-existing stuff? really? Let's rephrase it as: "Frameworks will >> only be advertised as available on a platform if they are just require >> Qt or other available dependencies on the platform". For example, >>

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015 20:23:00 Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Hi, > > > Christoph. > > > > I have had similar goals for a while, but haven't reached the point > > that I was having much success yet in that regard. One thing to keep > > in mind when developing installers, Qt Installer

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, > Hi, > With my Android hat on I very much welcome the initiative. Android is > more limited in this regard, as you will mostly always want to have > split packages there and it's how we've been working since the > beginning. > > I think that for us Qt is a safe base in general. relying on

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Christoph, I'm not trying to argue against having applications come in complete bundles at all. That is a worthy goal also actually, it's just not the direction I was headed in. You've made a lot more progress in this regard than I had though tbh. I see the kdewin installer as something that went

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Christoph. I have had similar goals for a while, but haven't reached the point that I was having much success yet in that regard. One thing to keep in mind when developing installers, Qt Installer Framework. I did a quick test with attica on OS X I can put on reviewboard to see what you think. I

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Christoph Cullmann wrote: > Hi, > > after some patching, we got around to a state that allows to e.g. use KWrite > on Windows or Mac with stock frameworks master and stock Qt 5.5, without any > additional > patches and no stuff like dbus

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Please, hold this poll in the user communities (as far as they exist), and not only among the developers. That is of course if you're doing all this with the requirements of the people who'll end up using your stuff foremost in mind. I think you'll find that many if not most Mac users don't

Re: [KDE/Mac] Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Tuesday October 20 2015 13:29:21 Jeremy Whiting wrote: >applications. I can also see the same power users recommending >individual applications to their relatives (moms, grandmothers, etc.) >using single application installers as you described. "Here mom, >download this one bundle to install

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hello, On Tuesday 20 October 2015 19:49:54 Aleix Pol wrote: > 3) non-existing stuff? really? Let's rephrase it as: "Frameworks will > only be advertised as available on a platform if they are just require > Qt or other available dependencies on the platform". For example, > requiring libssh could

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

> Aleix Pol hat am 20. Oktober 2015 um 19:49 geschrieben: > Regarding dbus especifically, I see the problem in 2). You can bundle > it, but then if it's already ran by another process the other one will > have to be used, which is where the dbus mess starts. There is work in

Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

Hi, after some patching, we got around to a state that allows to e.g. use KWrite on Windows or Mac with stock frameworks master and stock Qt 5.5, without any additional patches and no stuff like dbus running. (as standalone installer/bundles) To have KIO working, one needs to teach it how to

Re: Question about goal of Windows/Mac frameworks

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Ralf Habacker wrote: >> Christoph Cullmann hat am 20. Oktober 2015 um 16:49 >> geschrieben: > >> That works only, if the applications bundle their ui files in resources, >> too, otherwise, they just won't be found >> and the