Re: koffice/kplato

Am Dienstag 22 November 2005 08:56 schrieb Dag Andersen:
> On Mandag 21 november 2005 20:20, Thomas Zander wrote:
> > On Monday 21 November 2005 16:30, Raphael Langerhorst wrote:
> > > Remove KPT Prefix for all KPlato classes.
> >
> > Why did you do that?
> > And why did I not see any discussion on this topic at the kplato or
> > koffice-devel mailing lists? (cc-ing both)
> >
> > I was hoping all KOffice apps would follow the same naming
> > conventions, and this seems to mean KPlato is the only one not
> > using a prefix.
>
> So what do we do? (I have a reasonably large commit coming up
> dependent on KPT prefix, so if we're going to revert, I'll wait)
> I don't have a strong opinion on this myself, I'm kind of used to the
> prefixes, but I'm sure could get used to them not being there also ;)
> Seriously though, the future standard naming conventions for qt, kde
> and koffice seems to be filename=classname with extensions .cpp, .h.
> We need prefix in filenames (no?), we could use namespace (KPlato_ or
> kplato_) of course, but...
> Hmmm, seems I've talked myself into voting for keeping the KPT prefix
> after all, and renaming to follow koffice standard later.

Ok, so... yes, I introduced a major (developer visible) change to KPlato 
without discussing it here first. Probably because I had no internet 
connection at that time - and I made up my plans on the spot - and I thought 
it was something that is ok anyway, well, wrong.

Now that we have the changes in, and you know my reasoning for this, should we 
keep it the way it is now? Are there any objections (on which you insist) 
from your point of view?

I sure see the filename = classname rule is a valid argument to keep (revert 
to) the prefix - as filenames will (in any case) keep their prefix. But then, 
there is only the prefix difference between filename and class, right?

I'm sorry Dag, that you currently have sth in the pipeline based on old 
classnames. 

If there are no serious objections, I would like to keep it the way it is now 
for given reasons (on koffice-devel). I hope I did not offend anybody. If you 
definitely want to have the KPT prefix back, for whatever reasons, I will 
also adhere to that. I don't want to force you to sth that only I am happy 
with.

Dag, if you have many changes in only a few files then it would be fine with 
me if you commit them with the prefix and tell me to remove KPT afterwards 
(in case you have too many conflicts):
1) copy your modified soure to a safe location
2) svn up
3) copy back those files you changed into kplato
4) commit & tell me to remove the prefix (CCMAIL me)
5) I'll remove the KPT prefix of your committed files

Yes, this will leave koffice in a non-compilable state between 4 and 5.

Regards,
-- 
Raphael Langerhorst
http://raphael.g-system.at/blog