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

List:       kmdi-devel
Subject:    Re: KMDI is dead! Long live KMDI!
From:       Roland Krause <rokrau () yahoo ! com>
Date:       2006-01-26 23:27:22
Message-ID: 20060126232722.89081.qmail () web82105 ! mail ! mud ! yahoo ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

All,
a little while ago I sent out a RFP to produce a working implementation
of {Qext,K}MDI as a Qt-only solution. The proposal was geared towards
my needs in a commercial application but the resulting code is
obviously still to be opensourced. I have gotten proposals and it's now
looking like it might actually happen. 

Now, I am not interested in basing this library on KDE libs but it
could still be used as a base for the new KMDI. I think a
reimplementation of the DockWidget and a significant simplification of
the library in terms of available MDI modes is the key to make this
happen. 

Any comments or suggestions? 

Roland




--- Jaroslaw Staniek <js@iidea.pl> wrote:

> Christoph Cullmann said the following, On 2006-01-16 20:50:
> 
> > On Thursday 12 January 2006 10:31, Jens Herden wrote:
> > 
> >>>I'm curious to know what people's opinions are as far as the
> future of
> >>>KMDI for KDE 4 goes. Should it just go away? Should we have some
> form of
> >>>lightweight API based on the KateMDI stuff or the new KDevelop
> stuff?
> >>>Should we use something else completely new that falls out of the
> sky? ;)
> >>
> >>Please do not let it go away. I really believe that we should keep
> it in
> >>one or the other way and that the new stuff of Kate and KDevelop is
> no
> >>alternative.
> > 
> > You are aware that the kmdi port to Qt4 is horrible broken and that
> the 
> > kdockwidget are in the same state? Without a big effort, nothing of
> that 
> > stuff will work in any reasonable way in KDE4, therefor, better
> think about a 
> > replacement.
> > I can only speak for Kate, we will stick with our own stuff, at
> least it seems 
> > to work fine with Qt4 and is only one file with under 1000 lines of
> code.
> > If anything comes up, with a clean api, that supports the same set
> of 
> > features, I will switch over to use it, but it needs to have some
> things, 
> > like:
> >  - load/save of view config
> >  - no flickering while doing the above
> >  - no "I do view managment with 10 eventFilter hacks" put inside
> >  - no handcraftet splitters, really, source of all evil in
> kdockwidget
> >  - no crazy hacks to have dockwidget's, if it's not possible to
> reuse 
> > QDockWindow, than it must stay out
> > 
> 
> Every part of me said "yes"; I've encountered every problem you
> mentioned with 
> KMdi in Kexi and I am waiting for the replacement. It doesn't need to
> be 1-1 
> replacement for IDEAl. Toplevel mode and tabbed could be dead.
> Childframe 
> could be nice to have however, contrary to theory. What's nice in
> Childframe 
> is a Detach/attach command. I'd like to have it in IDEAl mode as
> well, as this 
> is nice feature for multihead systems.
> 
> -- 
> regards / pozdrawiam,
>   Jaroslaw Staniek / OpenOffice Polska
> 
>   Kexi Developer:      http://www.kexi-project.org |
> http://koffice.org/kexi
>   Kexi Support:        http://www.kexi-project.org/support.html
>   Kexi For MS Windows:
> http://kexi.pl/wiki/index.php/Kexi_for_MS_Windows
>   KDE3, KDE4 Libraries For Developing MS Windows Applications:
>                        http://www.kdelibs.com/wiki
> _______________________________________________
> Kmdi-devel mailing list
> Kmdi-devel@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmdi-devel
> 

_______________________________________________
Kmdi-devel mailing list
Kmdi-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmdi-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]