From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-07-03 17:11:56
|
http://blog.lxde.org/?p=1013 I just wrote a blog post about current progress of LXDE-Qt. Lxpanel-Qt now works (but it's still very basic, rough, and requires much polishing) Cheers! |
From: Jerome L. <ad...@gm...> - 2013-07-04 07:42:06
|
Really awesome. And holy hell, the screenshot looks like it could have been Razor-qt. I'm really glad we have an actively developped file manager and image viewer in Qt as those were two apps that were seriously missing. What is the desktop+file widget on the screenshot? Is it another lxde app, or pcmanfm taking care of it? Have you had a look at the code from razor-panel and razor-desktop? I strongly feel the panel would be better off merged with its razor counterpart. We've actually had a fair bit of work+cleanup recently on it. Let me know what you think. J. Leclanche On 3 July 2013 18:11, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > http://blog.lxde.org/?p=1013 > I just wrote a blog post about current progress of LXDE-Qt. > Lxpanel-Qt now works (but it's still very basic, rough, and requires > much polishing) > Cheers! > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Lxde-list mailing list > Lxd...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list > |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-07-04 09:47:50
|
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Jerome Leclanche <ad...@gm...> wrote: > Really awesome. > > And holy hell, the screenshot looks like it could have been Razor-qt. > > I'm really glad we have an actively developped file manager and image viewer > in Qt as those were two apps that were seriously missing. > > What is the desktop+file widget on the screenshot? Is it another lxde app, > or pcmanfm taking care of it? > > Have you had a look at the code from razor-panel and razor-desktop? > I strongly feel the panel would be better off merged with its razor > counterpart. We've actually had a fair bit of work+cleanup recently on it. > Let me know what you think. > > J. Leclanche Thank you for the rapid response. 1. PCManFM-Qt and LxImage-Qt are designed with razor-qt in mind. When running under razor-qt session, they load razor-qt config and applies your icon theme. So they can blend well with razor-qt natively. 2. The desktop wallpaper and file icons are managed by PCManFM-Qt, not another program. The benefit of this approach is obvious. The behavior will be consistent with the file manager. Besides, because the file manager is constantly running (as the desktop manager), subsequent launches of pcmanfm actually calls the existing process via IPC and ask for a new window. So opening other file manager windows becomes very fast and share the resources such as QPixmap caches for QIcon with the desktop manager part, reducing total memory usage of the whole desktop. 3. Lxpanel-qt uses some code from razor-panel, especially the systray and Xfitman code. I did my own panel instead of just improving razor-panel because I already have an gtk+3 based lxpanel port written in Vala. Since Vala syntax is very similar to C++ (actually C#), it's natural to port it to C++. In addition, razor-panel and its plugins currently relies on other razor libs and cannot be built outside the source tree of razor-qt. If the razor libs can be more modular it's possible for us to use them in the future. The layout and geometry of lxpanel is different from that of razpr-panel, too. Another problem is, we use glib inside lxpanel-qt and I want to use libfm in it, too. They're not dependencies of razor-qt. So I'm not able to do this with razor-panel. Hence I try to do lxpanel-qt. For future cooperation, I think we can share applications or libraries first. I'll ensure that other programs, such as the file manager and image viewer work as well in razor-qt and applies your configuration, such as the icon theme. In addition, I'll try to do what's lacking in both camps first, so both of us can share it. The panel is the only exception, which is currently a duplicate for the above reasons. The other way is through share of code and libs. I'll use some code from razor whenever possible. I actually read your code to learn Qt sometimes. :-) The quality of razor-qt code is good and I'm impressed. Some parts are even modular so can be used alone outside razor-qt with minimal modifications (for example, replacing signals with G_SIGNALS). Code reusability of your project is really good. Awesome! The remaining problem is hard to solve. Razor qt has many good c++ base libraries, such as that for xdg specs while we like to use C glib/gobject implementation from Gnome in some places. The reason is obvious. We're from the gtk+ world and are more familiar with the G libraries. In addition, since glib is installed by default in nearly every Linux distro and Qt are mostly compiled with glib integration, why not use it? Even if you don't use glib, it's still in the hard disk and memory. Reusing xdg implementation in glib/gio saves a lot of work and we get the implementation for free since it's already there. I'm not sure if using glib is OK for razor-qt. The other issue is, your code is modular, but these parts are finally compiled into one librazor-qt library. Using the libraries outside razor-qt source tree is not very easy, either. Otherwise I want to use razor-power much. :-) Will razor-qt source tree be separated into different modules in the future? Thanks |
From: Jerome L. <ad...@gm...> - 2013-07-04 10:07:57
|
On 4 July 2013 10:47, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > Will razor-qt source tree be separated into different modules in the > future? > I agree that's needed. I can't say whether it will actually be done, as I don't commit a lot myself, but for the sake of cooperation I do believe we should make it possible to compile like that. I believe razor libs are used for theming of the panel. I'm not sure the current approach is the best solution; it might be better if we make our theme config do the work of changing the panel config itself, rather than the panel pull in its config from razor theme. I don't know what else it's used for. CCing razor list as I'd like some comments from other devs in that regard. If pcmanfm manages the desktop that's cool, although please do make sure it's optional (so that other users can choose to run a third party desktop widget if they choose to). razor-desktop is optional itself as well, so that's a win-win. One issue with the file manager taking care of desktop management is the lack of support for extra desktop widgets (a desktop clock is the canonical example). In an ideal world, the desktop is managed by a desktop app (plasma, razor-desktop, ...) and file managers would provide some kind of standard interface to improve interaction between desktop and fm. I don't see that happening though. I believe it's more or less what plasma's FM widget does but that's still implementation-specific, so useless outside dolphin/kde. What do you use libfm for in the panel? I'm guessing the menu? If so, I'd say that's an overreach from libfm. I was thinking earlier about the possibility of razor-panel becoming its own third party app. Theming/branding are the main issue with that but not one that cannot be fixed. If you have any pull requests that would improve interaction in that regard, make sure to CC me on them on github (@Adys), I'll review them as well. J. Leclanche |
From: Andrea F. <an...@op...> - 2013-07-04 10:14:29
|
i don't want to sound annoying, but don't you think you are wasting time and focus? GTK2+ , GTK3, Qt.. a lot of "games" but little innovation or "real" development .. i have some questions.. where is the project going? what are the developers goals? what framework are you choosing to allow people to join and be productive? regards Andrea 2013/7/4 Jerome Leclanche <ad...@gm...> > > On 4 July 2013 10:47, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > >> Will razor-qt source tree be separated into different modules in the >> future? >> > > I agree that's needed. I can't say whether it will actually be done, as I > don't commit a lot myself, but for the sake of cooperation I do believe we > should make it possible to compile like that. > I believe razor libs are used for theming of the panel. I'm not sure the > current approach is the best solution; it might be better if we make our > theme config do the work of changing the panel config itself, rather than > the panel pull in its config from razor theme. I don't know what else it's > used for. > > CCing razor list as I'd like some comments from other devs in that regard. > > If pcmanfm manages the desktop that's cool, although please do make sure > it's optional (so that other users can choose to run a third party desktop > widget if they choose to). razor-desktop is optional itself as well, so > that's a win-win. > One issue with the file manager taking care of desktop management is the > lack of support for extra desktop widgets (a desktop clock is the canonical > example). In an ideal world, the desktop is managed by a desktop app > (plasma, razor-desktop, ...) and file managers would provide some kind of > standard interface to improve interaction between desktop and fm. I don't > see that happening though. I believe it's more or less what plasma's FM > widget does but that's still implementation-specific, so useless outside > dolphin/kde. > > What do you use libfm for in the panel? I'm guessing the menu? If so, I'd > say that's an overreach from libfm. > I was thinking earlier about the possibility of razor-panel becoming its > own third party app. Theming/branding are the main issue with that but not > one that cannot be fixed. > If you have any pull requests that would improve interaction in that > regard, make sure to CC me on them on github (@Adys), I'll review them as > well. > > J. Leclanche > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by Windows: > > Build for Windows Store. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/windows-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Lxde-list mailing list > Lxd...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list > > -- ------------------------------------------ Andrea Florio AT&T Brno - Tier 3 Network Specialist CISCO CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCNP Certified openSUSE Official Member (anubisg1) Email: an...@op... Email: af...@in... Cell: +39-328-7365667 Cell: +420-776-793519 Website: http://journey4ccie.com/ ------------------------------------------ |
From: Andrej N. G. <an...@re...> - 2013-07-04 10:39:35
|
Hello! Andrea Florio has written on Thursday, 4 July, at 12:14: >i don't want to sound annoying, but don't you think you are wasting time >and focus? >GTK2+ , GTK3, Qt.. a lot of "games" but little innovation or "real" >development .. >i have some questions.. >where is the project going? >what are the developers goals? >what framework are you choosing to allow people to join and be productive? As the most active developer of libfm and pcmanfm-gtk I can answer that GTK3 is a no go way. GTK2 is still used in development and pcmanfm which uses GTK2 is the most feature rich and resourse effective version at this moment. Qt versions of LXDE parts is in active development as well (thanks to PCMan). My desire is to have both versions (GTK2 and Qt ones) feature identical, with their code as close as possible which may allow to add bugfixes and features into both versions easily. If you want to help LXDE project you can use the framework you know better, be it GTK2 or Qt. Someone will help you port your changes into another version I believe, it's not so hard at last. And as always, if you want to contribute into project then do it with application which you like and which you use often enough. That is general rule for developer as always. :) Cheers! Andriy. |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-07-04 12:27:34
|
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Jerome Leclanche <ad...@gm...> wrote: > Really awesome. > > And holy hell, the screenshot looks like it could have been Razor-qt. > > I'm really glad we have an actively developped file manager and image viewer > in Qt as those were two apps that were seriously missing. > > What is the desktop+file widget on the screenshot? Is it another lxde app, > or pcmanfm taking care of it? BTW, the desktop management feature of PCManFM-Qt is optional. You don't need to turn it on if you don't like it. Regarding to desktop icons, I just figured out a new idea. I can add a special mode for desktop widget. In this mode, pcmanfm-qt does not cover the whole desktop background. Instead, it only covers a specified area and don't try to manage the whole screen space. In this way, we can still manage the wallpaper with razor-qt and pcmanfm-qt can work just like yet another desktop widget. Is this acceptable for your needs? |
From: Jerome L. <ad...@gm...> - 2013-07-04 12:30:33
|
Doesn't sound like it could be used. The idea would be to have actual app-managed widgets with an interface to the file manager for integration (grid style etc). J. Leclanche On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 1:27 PM, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Jerome Leclanche <ad...@gm...> > wrote: > > Really awesome. > > > > And holy hell, the screenshot looks like it could have been Razor-qt. > > > > I'm really glad we have an actively developped file manager and image > viewer > > in Qt as those were two apps that were seriously missing. > > > > What is the desktop+file widget on the screenshot? Is it another lxde > app, > > or pcmanfm taking care of it? > > BTW, the desktop management feature of PCManFM-Qt is optional. > You don't need to turn it on if you don't like it. > Regarding to desktop icons, I just figured out a new idea. > I can add a special mode for desktop widget. > In this mode, pcmanfm-qt does not cover the whole desktop background. > Instead, it only covers a specified area and don't try to manage the > whole screen space. > In this way, we can still manage the wallpaper with razor-qt and > pcmanfm-qt can work just like yet another desktop widget. > Is this acceptable for your needs? > |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-07-04 12:32:16
|
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 6:14 PM, Andrea Florio <an...@op...> wrote: > i don't want to sound annoying, but don't you think you are wasting time and > focus? > > GTK2+ , GTK3, Qt.. a lot of "games" but little innovation or "real" > development .. > > i have some questions.. > > where is the project going? > what are the developers goals? > what framework are you choosing to allow people to join and be productive? > > regards > Andrea This actually makes sense and is not a waste of time. We need a reliable and productive toolkit for the future. It's the attitude of upstream authors of the toolkits that really matters. If they're against their users and only care about their own need and branding, then it's not the right way to go. To make the project better, we need a toolkit which is designed for everyone and cares about different needs. It's quite frustrating that during new gtk+ release your application breaks so often. Seeing what he said when choosing the new kernel scheruler, I think Linus will also agree that the attitude of the maintainer is important. The CK patch sets are quite awesome and I really like them, though. |
From: Andrea F. <an...@op...> - 2013-07-04 12:59:08
|
Attention, i'm not arguing on what is the best framework for you to use. I'm just arguing on the fact that right now we have a static "stable" gtk environment. from this perspective, the Qt development is a simple experiment that is taking away valuable time that could be use to improve the gtk release. If you believe that Qt is better, not a problem, let's swap to Qt and develop in Qt... but at one point, better sooner then later, you will have to pick one, and focus your efforts on it. this is why i wrote those questions before... > where is the project going? > what are the developers goals? > what framework are you choosing to allow people to join and be productive? Andrea 2013/7/4 PCMan <pcm...@gm...> > This actually makes sense and is not a waste of time. > We need a reliable and productive toolkit for the future. > It's the attitude of upstream authors of the toolkits that really matters. > If they're against their users and only care about their own need and > branding, then it's not the right way to go. > To make the project better, we need a toolkit which is designed for > everyone and cares about different needs. > It's quite frustrating that during new gtk+ release your application > breaks so often. > Seeing what he said when choosing the new kernel scheruler, I think > Linus will also agree that the attitude of the maintainer is > important. > The CK patch sets are quite awesome and I really like them, though. > -- ------------------------------------------ Andrea Florio AT&T Brno - Tier 3 Network Specialist CISCO CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCNP Certified openSUSE Official Member (anubisg1) Email: an...@op... Email: af...@in... Cell: +39-328-7365667 Cell: +420-776-793519 Website: http://journey4ccie.com/ ------------------------------------------ |
From: Julien L. <gi...@ub...> - 2013-07-04 18:22:30
|
2013/7/4 Andrea Florio <an...@op...>: > Attention, i'm not arguing on what is the best framework for you to use. I'm > just arguing on the fact that right now we have a static "stable" gtk > environment. from this perspective, the Qt development is a simple > experiment that is taking away valuable time that could be use to improve > the gtk release. I'm not sure there is a lot of work done on the gtk2 part currently, and gtk2 is going to be unmaintained shortly. As the gtk3 part is blocked, pushing the Qt part doesn't sound like a total waste of time IMO. Regards, Julien Lavergne |
From: Andrea F. <an...@op...> - 2013-07-04 19:13:35
|
so this basically means that lxde will soon be QT based DE correct? This is the answer i was looking for. If that is going to happen, fine, no problem. lxde will be qt based and our efforts will focus on Qt. otherwise, as said, we should focus on improving what we have instead of experimenting.. once again, an answer to the 3 answer i made before will make it all clear! Andrea 2013/7/4 Julien Lavergne <gi...@ub...> > 2013/7/4 Andrea Florio <an...@op...>: > > Attention, i'm not arguing on what is the best framework for you to use. > I'm > > just arguing on the fact that right now we have a static "stable" gtk > > environment. from this perspective, the Qt development is a simple > > experiment that is taking away valuable time that could be use to improve > > the gtk release. > > I'm not sure there is a lot of work done on the gtk2 part currently, > and gtk2 is going to be unmaintained shortly. As the gtk3 part is > blocked, pushing the Qt part doesn't sound like a total waste of time > IMO. > > Regards, > Julien Lavergne > -- ------------------------------------------ Andrea Florio AT&T Brno - Tier 3 Network Specialist CISCO CCNA, CCNA Wireless, CCNP Certified openSUSE Official Member (anubisg1) Email: an...@op... Email: af...@in... Cell: +39-328-7365667 Cell: +420-778-033288 Website: http://journey4ccie.com/ ------------------------------------------ |