From koffice-devel  Tue Aug 10 13:22:51 2010
From: zander () kde ! org
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:22:51 +0000
To: koffice-devel
Subject: Re: design discussion: progress classes in KOffice
Message-Id: <201008101522.51956.zander () kde ! org>
X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=koffice-devel&m=128146257005226

On Tuesday 10. August 2010 09.10.49 Jos van den Oever wrote:
> I've been using the progress classes quite a bit the last week and come to
> the  conclusion that I do not like them. Mainly I think the api of the
> classes KoUpdater, KoUpdaterPrivate, KoProgressUpdater is confusing and
> overly heavy.

I think this was the consensus already :)
I wrote the initial versions and the way they work sounds wrong to me now. I 
would do it differently now, using only QObject stuff.
 
> So I've come up with a new design in the form of a header file and I would
> like  people to have a look at it and see if they like it.

I'm more than fine with you picking up a new project but I don't think we 
should replace the current classes any time soon.
Multithreading stuff takes a lot of time to stabilize and Krita is using it 
rather heavily so replacing this sounds risky and can have a big influence on 
the stability of the applications.

The class lives in a library that is not scheduled to be made public and so 
not going to have BC or SC requirements any time soon.
Maybe this cleanup can wait until we are a bit more stable and get at least 
the various apps into end-user-ready state.  Which I think everyone agreed at 
the last meeting was the first goal.
-- 
Thomas Zander
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel