[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: moving KNotification in kdelibs.
From:       Richard Moore <richmoore44 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2005-11-20 16:22:35
Message-ID: 5491a5150511200822s12579c92p5375a9260a1f4dae () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 11/20/05, Olivier Goffart <ogoffart@kde.org> wrote:
>
> But this is to respect the "complicated-passive-popup spec"

 This spec only offers a subset of the flexibility I put in the
KPassivePopup API - for example, a KPassivePopup can be a 'passive dialog'
when the API is used directly rather than via KNoitfy (it can contain
arbitrary widgets). Is the idea that these should all be handled by the
daemon?
 Cheers
 Rich.

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<br><br>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/20/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Olivier \
Goffart</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:ogoffart@kde.org">ogoffart@kde.org</a>&gt; \
wrote:</span> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px \
0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">But this is to respect the \
&quot;complicated-passive-popup spec&quot;</blockquote> <div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>This spec only offers a subset of the flexibility I put in the KPassivePopup API \
- for example, a KPassivePopup can be a 'passive dialog' when the API is used \
directly rather than via KNoitfy (it can contain arbitrary widgets). Is the idea that \
these should all be handled by the daemon? </div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Cheers</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Rich.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div><br>&nbsp;</div>



[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]