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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Review Request: Use in-memory dom document when editing toolbars,
From:       "David Faure" <faure () kde ! org>
Date:       2009-09-25 11:48:30
Message-ID: 20090925114830.8962.67501 () localhost
[Download RAW message or body]



> On 2009-09-25 10:09:18, Thomas Friedrichsmeier wrote:
> > I see, I'm a bit late to reply. But anyway:
> > 
> > I have not really tested this, as I do not generally have the time to \
> > follow SVN closely. I do not think this will affect me / my application \
> > in any way, but: 
> > In light of this: http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/1238/, I think it would \
> > generally be cleaner if XMLGUI-changes are always written to disc \
> > somewhere. At least if any third application is expected to embed this \
> > client. (The details of the linked patch don't matter too much, here, \
> > but to solve the synchronization problems outlined in that review \
> > request, hosting applications will probably always rely on reloading \
> > the XML from disc one way or another. Alternative: Provide public API \
> > to make an XMLGUIClient reload the settings from the localXMLFile, \
> > only).

Thanks for the feedback.

Well, I don't see how the two things are contradictory. If the user edits \
toolbars, we still save the result to a file, and other instances of the \
application can reload that, i.e. update the QDomDocument inside their \
kxmlguiclient. The only thing I'm changing here is that kedittoolbar starts \
from the domdocument of the guiclient from memory, rather than from disk. \
But for the GUI to be correct already, surely your "syncer" has to update \
the domdocument of the guiclient, so no problem?

I think the confusion is about which "kxmlguiclient changes" we're talking \
about. The use case I see for setDomDocument() (which means, dynamic \
changes not on disk), is the case where applications hardcode stuff like \
"remove those actions that should not appear in this context" (e.g. \
kaddressbookpart-inside-kontact). This is not a user-configured change, it \
should not be written to disk upfront (if it was, it would mess up \
kaddressbook-standalone, while at least now it only does that when the user \
configure toolbars; corner case).

You are right about the fact that the "syncer" means reloading from disk, \
which in the kaddressbookpart-inside-kontact case [if kontact wasn't a \
uniqueapplication ;)] would mean that those dynamic changes to the XML \
would have to be redone. Just like they are currently redone when editing \
toolbars, btw. (cf MainWindow::slotNewToolbarConfig() in kontact). In fact \
this isn't the only thing that needs to be done after rebuilding the GUI \
(from edittoolbars), the other thing is plugging back any ActionLists. For \
that reason, the "syncer" probably breaks actionlists right now... With the \
current infrastructure, it sounds like what we need is a kxmlguifactory \
signal that apps would connect to that same slotNewToolbarConfig slot, \
which is where the code for "stuff that has to be done after createGUI" is \
located. It would be emitted by the method you mention it should have, for \
removing+readding all clients, moving that code out of kedittoolbarwidget.
Well there's probably a better design for all this, but reviewboard isn't \
the best place for thinking about and discussing design :-)
(hmm, and now I'm commenting on r/1238 in the comments for r/1694 :-)

Anyway, going back to this patch, I think that overall the future syncer \
doesn't prevent kedittoolbar starting from the in-memory domdocument in \
order to allow dynamic changes, but feel free to prove me wrong :)

PS: I don't understand your "Alternative" suggestion.


- David


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/1694/#review2466
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2009-09-22 18:38:22, David Faure wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/1694/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2009-09-22 18:38:22)
> 
> 
> Review request for kdelibs.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> Users of KXmlGuiClient::setDOMDocument probably noticed that the dynamic \
> changes made to the guiclient's XML, where not taken into account in \
> KEditToolBar.  
> This is because KEditToolBar loads the XML file again from disk, rather \
> than using the in-memory XML tree. (And this in turn is probably because \
> in KDE3, we had KXMLGUIClient::conserveMemory which got rid of the \
> in-memory xml tree, but we removed it for KDE4 because it broke any kind \
> of dynamic changes like action lists, plugins etc.) 
> So the fix is simple: using the in-memory domDocument() instead. The \
> question is what it breaks. I noticed that the ui_standards.rc merging \
> left the name and version attributes of ui_standards.rc into the toplevel \
> tag -- fixed in r1026838. 
> If your app does unusual stuff around xmlguiclients and/or toolbar \
> editing, please test this patch before I commit it.
> 
> The reason for all this is bug 207296, but surely I'm not the first user \
> of setDOMDocument. I see that knotes, kopete, and kross use it already, \
> at least. 
> 
> This addresses bug 207296.
> https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=207296
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
> trunk/KDE/kdelibs/kdeui/dialogs/kedittoolbar.cpp 1025321 
> 
> Diff: http://reviewboard.kde.org/r/1694/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Editing toolbars in kontact, konqueror, kate.
> 
> [found an unrelated bug while testing in konq, the Tools menu moves to \
> first position, even w/o the patch...] 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> David
> 
> 


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