[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Kuickshow replacement in KDE 4.2.2



Am Sonntag, 19. April 2009 schrieb Alejandro Exojo:

Hi,

> Are you subscribed to debian-kde? 

now I am :-)

> And BTW, did you rececieve one email I 
> sent you on 25-02-2009?

Now that you tell me -- yes, I actually did receive it. I'm sorry, apparently 
I have overlooked it back then.

> The most important thing I said then, is that I set up a page on Userbase:
> http://userbase.kde.org/KuickShow

Thanks a bunch for setting that up. We should use that as the 
primary "homepage" for KuickShow now. The information on the Sourceforge site 
is kinda outdated ;-)

> Great! I found it very usable, yes. My only problem so far, is that I
> mostly use KuickShow started from another application (a file manager, o
> clicking a link in KMail, etc.), and when I test it from the command line
> making it open a new file (instead of opening first the filemanager), mouse
> and keyboard have no effect.

Thanks for telling me about that, I didn't notice that yet.

> I will start learning again how to package. Last time I did one, it was a
> KDE3 app, so many things are different. I will ask the KDE maintainers,
> though, maybe they prefer to add KuickShow to their package list, specially
> if you plan to add it again to kdegraphics at some point.

Cool, thanks.

> Two small thoughts:
> - The version in the 3.5 branch is 0.8.13, while in trunk is 0.8.7. ;-)

Eek. How did that happen...

> Is not a serious issue, since the packaged version doesn't have to match
> that. - Do you plan releasing a tarball?

A binary or a source tarball? I didn't plan the release yet, so I'm open for 
suggestions.

> And by the way, if you want me to do some junior job, tell me. I found that
> there are simple things that I could try, like porting code that uses Qt3
> layout classes. I also found that at least some code is not used
> (mainwidget.*, if I looked properly). I just don't dare to touch a thing. I
> don't want to do something wrong. :)

OK, I'll come up with something, thanks for your offer!

Cheers,
Carsten

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Reply to: