From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-08-06 11:05:30
|
For ease of future development, I took some time and tried to split the monolithic razor-qt repo into smaller splitted ones with all history preserved. Please see this: https://github.com/lxde Repos are renamed to avoid conflicts with the original razor programs. Members of the original razor-qt@github are also added to lxde@github. All components do not compile now, and libraries are not yet split. The CMake rules need to be fixed before they can be compiled correctly. I'll try to see if I know how to do it later. Thank you. |
From: Jerome L. <ad...@gm...> - 2013-08-06 11:26:44
|
Thanks. I'll see about making some pkgbuilds. Can you come on irc? J. Leclanche On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 12:05 PM, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > For ease of future development, I took some time and tried to split > the monolithic razor-qt repo into smaller splitted ones with all > history preserved. > > Please see this: > https://github.com/lxde > > Repos are renamed to avoid conflicts with the original razor programs. > Members of the original razor-qt@github are also added to lxde@github. > > All components do not compile now, and libraries are not yet split. > The CMake rules need to be fixed before they can be compiled correctly. > I'll try to see if I know how to do it later. > > Thank you. > > -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Razor-qt" group. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/razor-qt?hl=en > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Razor-qt" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to raz...@go.... > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > |
From: Samuel S. <s.s...@go...> - 2013-08-06 11:54:54
|
2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...>: > For ease of future development, I took some time and tried to split > the monolithic razor-qt repo into smaller splitted ones with all > history preserved. > > Please see this: > https://github.com/lxde > > Repos are renamed to avoid conflicts with the original razor programs. > Members of the original razor-qt@github are also added to lxde@github. > > All components do not compile now, and libraries are not yet split. > The CMake rules need to be fixed before they can be compiled correctly. > I'll try to see if I know how to do it later. > > Thank you. > Hi, any info about what license the new code will use? Just asking as I see no COPYING files around. -- Regards Samuel |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-08-06 12:22:46
|
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Samuel Stirtzel <s.s...@go...> wrote: > 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...>: >> For ease of future development, I took some time and tried to split >> the monolithic razor-qt repo into smaller splitted ones with all >> history preserved. >> >> Please see this: >> https://github.com/lxde >> >> Repos are renamed to avoid conflicts with the original razor programs. >> Members of the original razor-qt@github are also added to lxde@github. >> >> All components do not compile now, and libraries are not yet split. >> The CMake rules need to be fixed before they can be compiled correctly. >> I'll try to see if I know how to do it later. >> >> Thank you. >> > > Hi, > > any info about what license the new code will use? > Just asking as I see no COPYING files around. > -- > Regards > Samuel I only split the repos using git and shell commands. I haven't fix the missing files and the Makefiles. The COPYING files need to be copied from the original toplevel razor-qt dir. Some CMake modules need to be copied from the original razor-qt dir as well. I'll try to see if I can fix them later. |
From: Petr V. <pe...@ya...> - 2013-08-06 12:30:51
|
we tried to create wverything we can under LGPL2+ and almost all our code was under this license. Only some 3rd party stuff use GPL/BSD/do what you want license mix On 08/06/2013 01:54 PM, Samuel Stirtzel wrote: > 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...>: >> For ease of future development, I took some time and tried to split >> the monolithic razor-qt repo into smaller splitted ones with all >> history preserved. >> >> Please see this: >> https://github.com/lxde >> >> Repos are renamed to avoid conflicts with the original razor programs. >> Members of the original razor-qt@github are also added to lxde@github. >> >> All components do not compile now, and libraries are not yet split. >> The CMake rules need to be fixed before they can be compiled correctly. >> I'll try to see if I know how to do it later. >> >> Thank you. >> > Hi, > > any info about what license the new code will use? > Just asking as I see no COPYING files around. > > > |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-08-06 13:04:00
|
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Petr Vanek <pe...@ya...> wrote: > we tried to create wverything we can under LGPL2+ and almost all our > code was under this license. > Only some 3rd party stuff use GPL/BSD/do what you want license mix > > On 08/06/2013 01:54 PM, Samuel Stirtzel wrote: >> 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...>: >>> For ease of future development, I took some time and tried to split >>> the monolithic razor-qt repo into smaller splitted ones with all >>> history preserved. >>> >>> Please see this: >>> https://github.com/lxde >>> >>> Repos are renamed to avoid conflicts with the original razor programs. >>> Members of the original razor-qt@github are also added to lxde@github. >>> >>> All components do not compile now, and libraries are not yet split. >>> The CMake rules need to be fixed before they can be compiled correctly. >>> I'll try to see if I know how to do it later. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >> Hi, >> >> any info about what license the new code will use? >> Just asking as I see no COPYING files around. >> Fixed! It seems that razor-config-mouse is the only part that uses GPL. Other existing razor-qt components are using LGPL2. I just added COPYING and AUTHORS files to the repos. Later I'll try to fix the broken makefiles to make them compile again. Thanks. |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-08-06 13:54:01
|
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:12 PM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> wrote: > I can help with libraries. We have some achievements - > https://github.com/Razor-qt/razor-qt/commits/separate-build > What name will have libraries? > > 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...> >> >> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Petr Vanek <pe...@ya...> wrote: >> > we tried to create wverything we can under LGPL2+ and almost all our >> > code was under this license. >> > Only some 3rd party stuff use GPL/BSD/do what you want license mix >> > >> > On 08/06/2013 01:54 PM, Samuel Stirtzel wrote: >> >> 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...>: >> >>> For ease of future development, I took some time and tried to split >> >>> the monolithic razor-qt repo into smaller splitted ones with all >> >>> history preserved. >> >>> >> >>> Please see this: >> >>> https://github.com/lxde >> >>> >> >>> Repos are renamed to avoid conflicts with the original razor programs. >> >>> Members of the original razor-qt@github are also added to lxde@github. >> >>> >> >>> All components do not compile now, and libraries are not yet split. >> >>> The CMake rules need to be fixed before they can be compiled >> >>> correctly. >> >>> I'll try to see if I know how to do it later. >> >>> >> >>> Thank you. >> >>> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> any info about what license the new code will use? >> >> Just asking as I see no COPYING files around. >> >> >> >> Fixed! >> It seems that razor-config-mouse is the only part that uses GPL. >> Other existing razor-qt components are using LGPL2. >> I just added COPYING and AUTHORS files to the repos. >> >> Later I'll try to fix the broken makefiles to make them compile again. >> >> Thanks. >> >> -- >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Razor-qt" group. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/razor-qt?hl=en >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Razor-qt" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to raz...@go.... >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- > Best regards, > Alexander. By the time of this writing, I just did more split. Here is a list: libraries/qtxdg => libqtxdg libraries/razor => liblxqt libraries/razormount => liblxqt-mount libraries/sysstat => libsysstat I just give prefix "lib" to every lib so it's quite clear that it's a library. The names can be changed to anything you guys want if there are better ones. I have no strong opinions about the name of libraries. I only try to avoid name clashes. If you have better names, please feel free to rename them. Check it here if you want. I already added all members of razor-qt to lxde as well so everybody should have the permission to edit. https://github.com/lxde Again, only the repos are separated. They cannot compile at the moment due to broken CMakeLists.txt and missing modules. The makefiles and missing cmake modules need to be fixed later. I checked the source code and it seems that all parts are using LGPL2+. So I also added AUTHORS and COPYING files to the new repos. Thanks |
From: Luís P. <lui...@gm...> - 2013-08-08 11:38:24
|
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 6:53 AM, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > By the time of this writing, I just did more split. > Here is a list: > libraries/qtxdg => libqtxdg > libraries/razor => liblxqt > libraries/razormount => liblxqt-mount > libraries/sysstat => libsysstat libqtxdg was already split at: https://github.com/luis-pereira/qtxdg and working -- Luís Pereira |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-08-06 15:18:34
|
I just made liblxqt (formerly librazorqt) compile independently. The fix is a little bit ugly (copy and paste from the toplevel CMakeLists.txt). Anyway, it works. I haven't change its binary name, so it's still librazorqt now. Later we can rename it, and start fixing other components depending on it. I'll start with some less important stuff, such as razor-about and razor-policykit. I won't touch the panel, which is by far the most complicated thing, at the moment. Cheers! |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-08-07 02:21:57
|
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> wrote: > I changed libqtxdg now it provide cmake find file. So cmake for the > application what use qtxdg should be like > > find_package(QTXDG REQUIRED) > include(${QTXDG_USE_FILE}) > > worked example > https://github.com/Razor-qt/razor-qt/blob/separate-build/razorqt-confupdate/CMakeLists.txt > You can copy razorqt-confupdate into separate dir and build it. > > > 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...> >> >> I just made liblxqt (formerly librazorqt) compile independently. >> The fix is a little bit ugly (copy and paste from the toplevel >> CMakeLists.txt). >> Anyway, it works. >> I haven't change its binary name, so it's still librazorqt now. >> Later we can rename it, and start fixing other components depending on it. >> I'll start with some less important stuff, such as razor-about and >> razor-policykit. >> I won't touch the panel, which is by far the most complicated thing, >> at the moment. >> > I have such patches for librazor, let's I change it. > > -- > Best regards, > Alexander. Cool! I just tested libqtxdg and it compiles well. There are some issues I'd like to ask for opinions. 1. component naming: Should we use "lxqt-" prefix proposed earlier or it's better to use "lxdeqt-"? It's a little weird sometimes that the binary name is different from project name. 2. dir naming: Should the config and data dirs be named lxqt, or lxdeqt, or lxde-qt? 3. API naming: Should we retain Razor* names for all of the APIs for backward compatibility, or we need to rename them to LxQt* and do typedef for Razor ones for backward compatibility? 4. C++ Namespace: Should we prefix every class name with "Razor" (or "LxQt", "LxdeQt"), or we should use C++ namespace? (for ex: Razor::Panel or LxdeQt::Panel). We used C++ namespace in lxde-qt, but if you prefer the current way, I'm OK with adding prefix to every class name and ignore C++ namespace, too. 5. There seems to be different parts of global shortcut stuff put separately in three places. librazorqt, and the other 2 libs in razor-qt/libraries. What's the relationship among them? Can we simplify this and put them in one single component? Comments are wanted so we can continue. Thanks a lot! |
From: Kuzma S. <lea...@gm...> - 2013-08-07 02:59:30
|
My opinion: 1. lxqt 2. lxqt 3. I think we discussed that we do not provide backward compatibility. 4. It's really good to use C++ namespace rather than C-style prefix, so: lxqt:: 5. I just checked and really found 1 file (razorshortcutbutton_p.h) in librazorqt - it's not used and it had to be removed with other old files when the current global shortcuts were implemented. so ignore it. "razor-global-key-shortcut-selector" library contains a widget to select a shortcut - it's used in config dialogs of apps and plugins which support global shortcuts, it's also used in global shortcut config app: "razorqt-globalkeyshortcuts/config". "razor-global-key-shortcuts-client" - is a library which is actually connects to global shortcut daemon. it's used in apps and plugins which support global shortcuts, but not used in the config app. They potentially could be merged, but "razor-global-key-shortcuts-client" does not requires QtGui/QtWidgets, while "razor-global-key-shortcut-selector" is purely a UI widget, so in short words - it's better to keep them separately, I think. Cheers, Kuzma P.S. I had a problem with naming this global shortcut system - I don't really like this huge "razor-global-key-shortcuts-...". Any naming suggestions are welcome! On 7 August 2013 14:21, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> > wrote: > > I changed libqtxdg now it provide cmake find file. So cmake for the > > application what use qtxdg should be like > > > > find_package(QTXDG REQUIRED) > > include(${QTXDG_USE_FILE}) > > > > worked example > > > https://github.com/Razor-qt/razor-qt/blob/separate-build/razorqt-confupdate/CMakeLists.txt > > You can copy razorqt-confupdate into separate dir and build it. > > > > > > 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...> > >> > >> I just made liblxqt (formerly librazorqt) compile independently. > >> The fix is a little bit ugly (copy and paste from the toplevel > >> CMakeLists.txt). > >> Anyway, it works. > >> I haven't change its binary name, so it's still librazorqt now. > >> Later we can rename it, and start fixing other components depending on > it. > >> I'll start with some less important stuff, such as razor-about and > >> razor-policykit. > >> I won't touch the panel, which is by far the most complicated thing, > >> at the moment. > >> > > I have such patches for librazor, let's I change it. > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Alexander. > > Cool! I just tested libqtxdg and it compiles well. > There are some issues I'd like to ask for opinions. > > 1. component naming: > Should we use "lxqt-" prefix proposed earlier or it's better to use > "lxdeqt-"? It's a little weird sometimes that the binary name is > different from project name. > > 2. dir naming: > Should the config and data dirs be named lxqt, or lxdeqt, or lxde-qt? > > 3. API naming: > Should we retain Razor* names for all of the APIs for backward > compatibility, or we need to rename them to LxQt* and do typedef for > Razor ones for backward compatibility? > > 4. C++ Namespace: > Should we prefix every class name with "Razor" (or "LxQt", "LxdeQt"), > or we should use C++ namespace? (for ex: Razor::Panel or > LxdeQt::Panel). We used C++ namespace in lxde-qt, but if you prefer > the current way, I'm OK with adding prefix to every class name and > ignore C++ namespace, too. > > 5. There seems to be different parts of global shortcut stuff put > separately in three places. librazorqt, and the other 2 libs in > razor-qt/libraries. What's the relationship among them? Can we > simplify this and put them in one single component? > > Comments are wanted so we can continue. > Thanks a lot! > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite! > It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production. > Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. > Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897031&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Lxde-list mailing list > Lxd...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list > |
From: <chr...@su...> - 2013-08-07 05:11:37
|
2013/8/7 Kuzma Shapran <lea...@gm...> > My opinion: > 1. lxqt > 2. lxqt > 3. I think we discussed that we do not provide backward compatibility. > 4. It's really good to use C++ namespace rather than C-style prefix, so: > lxqt:: > I agree: lxqt, lxqt and lxqt:: . And we do not need to be backward compatible. br. Chr. > 5. I just checked and really found 1 file (razorshortcutbutton_p.h) in > librazorqt - it's not used and it had to be removed with other old files > when the current global shortcuts were implemented. so ignore it. > "razor-global-key-shortcut-selector" library contains a widget to select a > shortcut - it's used in config dialogs of apps and plugins which support > global shortcuts, it's also used in global shortcut config app: > "razorqt-globalkeyshortcuts/config". > "razor-global-key-shortcuts-client" - is a library which is actually > connects to global shortcut daemon. it's used in apps and plugins which > support global shortcuts, but not used in the config app. > They potentially could be merged, but "razor-global-key-shortcuts-client" > does not requires QtGui/QtWidgets, while > "razor-global-key-shortcut-selector" is purely a UI widget, so in short > words - it's better to keep them separately, I think. > > Cheers, > Kuzma > > P.S. I had a problem with naming this global shortcut system - I don't > really like this huge "razor-global-key-shortcuts-...". Any naming > suggestions are welcome! > > > On 7 August 2013 14:21, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> >> wrote: >> > I changed libqtxdg now it provide cmake find file. So cmake for the >> > application what use qtxdg should be like >> > >> > find_package(QTXDG REQUIRED) >> > include(${QTXDG_USE_FILE}) >> > >> > worked example >> > >> https://github.com/Razor-qt/razor-qt/blob/separate-build/razorqt-confupdate/CMakeLists.txt >> > You can copy razorqt-confupdate into separate dir and build it. >> > >> > >> > 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...> >> >> >> >> I just made liblxqt (formerly librazorqt) compile independently. >> >> The fix is a little bit ugly (copy and paste from the toplevel >> >> CMakeLists.txt). >> >> Anyway, it works. >> >> I haven't change its binary name, so it's still librazorqt now. >> >> Later we can rename it, and start fixing other components depending on >> it. >> >> I'll start with some less important stuff, such as razor-about and >> >> razor-policykit. >> >> I won't touch the panel, which is by far the most complicated thing, >> >> at the moment. >> >> >> > I have such patches for librazor, let's I change it. >> > >> > -- >> > Best regards, >> > Alexander. >> >> Cool! I just tested libqtxdg and it compiles well. >> There are some issues I'd like to ask for opinions. >> >> 1. component naming: >> Should we use "lxqt-" prefix proposed earlier or it's better to use >> "lxdeqt-"? It's a little weird sometimes that the binary name is >> different from project name. >> >> 2. dir naming: >> Should the config and data dirs be named lxqt, or lxdeqt, or lxde-qt? >> >> 3. API naming: >> Should we retain Razor* names for all of the APIs for backward >> compatibility, or we need to rename them to LxQt* and do typedef for >> Razor ones for backward compatibility? >> >> 4. C++ Namespace: >> Should we prefix every class name with "Razor" (or "LxQt", "LxdeQt"), >> or we should use C++ namespace? (for ex: Razor::Panel or >> LxdeQt::Panel). We used C++ namespace in lxde-qt, but if you prefer >> the current way, I'm OK with adding prefix to every class name and >> ignore C++ namespace, too. >> >> 5. There seems to be different parts of global shortcut stuff put >> separately in three places. librazorqt, and the other 2 libs in >> razor-qt/libraries. What's the relationship among them? Can we >> simplify this and put them in one single component? >> >> Comments are wanted so we can continue. >> Thanks a lot! >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite! >> It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production. >> Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. >> Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. >> >> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897031&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk >> _______________________________________________ >> Lxde-list mailing list >> Lxd...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list >> > > -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Razor-qt" group. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/razor-qt?hl=en > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Razor-qt" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to raz...@go.... > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > |
From: Jerome L. <ad...@gm...> - 2013-08-07 05:13:14
|
Yes, backwards compatibility in fact was explicitely meant to be broken. Agreed on lxqt / lxqt. J. Leclanche On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:03 AM, chr...@su... <chr...@su... > wrote: > 2013/8/7 Kuzma Shapran <lea...@gm...> > >> My opinion: >> 1. lxqt >> 2. lxqt >> 3. I think we discussed that we do not provide backward compatibility. >> 4. It's really good to use C++ namespace rather than C-style prefix, so: >> lxqt:: >> > > I agree: lxqt, lxqt and lxqt:: . And we do not need to be backward > compatible. > > br. Chr. > > >> 5. I just checked and really found 1 file (razorshortcutbutton_p.h) in >> librazorqt - it's not used and it had to be removed with other old files >> when the current global shortcuts were implemented. so ignore it. >> "razor-global-key-shortcut-selector" library contains a widget to select >> a shortcut - it's used in config dialogs of apps and plugins which support >> global shortcuts, it's also used in global shortcut config app: >> "razorqt-globalkeyshortcuts/config". >> "razor-global-key-shortcuts-client" - is a library which is actually >> connects to global shortcut daemon. it's used in apps and plugins which >> support global shortcuts, but not used in the config app. >> They potentially could be merged, but "razor-global-key-shortcuts-client" >> does not requires QtGui/QtWidgets, while >> "razor-global-key-shortcut-selector" is purely a UI widget, so in short >> words - it's better to keep them separately, I think. >> >> Cheers, >> Kuzma >> >> P.S. I had a problem with naming this global shortcut system - I don't >> really like this huge "razor-global-key-shortcuts-...". Any naming >> suggestions are welcome! >> >> >> On 7 August 2013 14:21, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> >>> wrote: >>> > I changed libqtxdg now it provide cmake find file. So cmake for the >>> > application what use qtxdg should be like >>> > >>> > find_package(QTXDG REQUIRED) >>> > include(${QTXDG_USE_FILE}) >>> > >>> > worked example >>> > >>> https://github.com/Razor-qt/razor-qt/blob/separate-build/razorqt-confupdate/CMakeLists.txt >>> > You can copy razorqt-confupdate into separate dir and build it. >>> > >>> > >>> > 2013/8/6 PCMan <pcm...@gm...> >>> >> >>> >> I just made liblxqt (formerly librazorqt) compile independently. >>> >> The fix is a little bit ugly (copy and paste from the toplevel >>> >> CMakeLists.txt). >>> >> Anyway, it works. >>> >> I haven't change its binary name, so it's still librazorqt now. >>> >> Later we can rename it, and start fixing other components depending >>> on it. >>> >> I'll start with some less important stuff, such as razor-about and >>> >> razor-policykit. >>> >> I won't touch the panel, which is by far the most complicated thing, >>> >> at the moment. >>> >> >>> > I have such patches for librazor, let's I change it. >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Best regards, >>> > Alexander. >>> >>> Cool! I just tested libqtxdg and it compiles well. >>> There are some issues I'd like to ask for opinions. >>> >>> 1. component naming: >>> Should we use "lxqt-" prefix proposed earlier or it's better to use >>> "lxdeqt-"? It's a little weird sometimes that the binary name is >>> different from project name. >>> >>> 2. dir naming: >>> Should the config and data dirs be named lxqt, or lxdeqt, or lxde-qt? >>> >>> 3. API naming: >>> Should we retain Razor* names for all of the APIs for backward >>> compatibility, or we need to rename them to LxQt* and do typedef for >>> Razor ones for backward compatibility? >>> >>> 4. C++ Namespace: >>> Should we prefix every class name with "Razor" (or "LxQt", "LxdeQt"), >>> or we should use C++ namespace? (for ex: Razor::Panel or >>> LxdeQt::Panel). We used C++ namespace in lxde-qt, but if you prefer >>> the current way, I'm OK with adding prefix to every class name and >>> ignore C++ namespace, too. >>> >>> 5. There seems to be different parts of global shortcut stuff put >>> separately in three places. librazorqt, and the other 2 libs in >>> razor-qt/libraries. What's the relationship among them? Can we >>> simplify this and put them in one single component? >>> >>> Comments are wanted so we can continue. >>> Thanks a lot! >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite! >>> It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production. >>> Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. >>> Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. >>> >>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897031&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Lxde-list mailing list >>> Lxd...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list >>> >> >> -- >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Razor-qt" group. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/razor-qt?hl=en >> >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Razor-qt" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to raz...@go.... >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> > > -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Razor-qt" group. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/razor-qt?hl=en > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Razor-qt" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to raz...@go.... > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > |
From: Александр С. <sok...@gm...> - 2013-08-07 10:05:56
|
2013/8/7 PCMan <pcm...@gm...> > Cool! I just tested libqtxdg and it compiles well. > There are some issues I'd like to ask for opinions. > > 1. component naming: > Should we use "lxqt-" prefix proposed earlier or it's better to use > "lxdeqt-"? It's a little weird sometimes that the binary name is > different from project name. > > 2. dir naming: > Should the config and data dirs be named lxqt, or lxdeqt, or lxde-qt? > > 3. API naming: > Should we retain Razor* names for all of the APIs for backward > compatibility, or we need to rename them to LxQt* and do typedef for > Razor ones for backward compatibility? > > 4. C++ Namespace: > Should we prefix every class name with "Razor" (or "LxQt", "LxdeQt"), > or we should use C++ namespace? (for ex: Razor::Panel or > LxdeQt::Panel). We used C++ namespace in lxde-qt, but if you prefer > the current way, I'm OK with adding prefix to every class name and > ignore C++ namespace, too. > > 5. There seems to be different parts of global shortcut stuff put > separately in three places. librazorqt, and the other 2 libs in > razor-qt/libraries. What's the relationship among them? Can we > simplify this and put them in one single component? > 1. The lxqt is better, the lxdeqt is too long. Btw, what is official naming, LXDEQT, LXDEQt? 2. lxqt. 3. We should to rename classes. While we porting the code, we can use typedef, but before release we completely get away from the razor. 4. The namespace is good for me, but what is namespace? LxdeQt, LXDEQt, LxQt or what? 5. @Kuzma IMHO razor-global-key-shortcuts-client and razor-global-key-shortcut-selector is madness, let's use some like lxqt-shortcuts-client and lxqt-shortcuts-selector. -- Best regards, Alexander. |
From: Kuzma S. <lea...@gm...> - 2013-08-07 22:18:47
|
On 7 August 2013 22:05, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> wrote: > > 1. The lxqt is better, the lxdeqt is too long. Btw, what is official > naming, LXDEQT, LXDEQt? > 2. lxqt. > 3. We should to rename classes. While we porting the code, we can use > typedef, but before release we completely get away from the razor. > 4. The namespace is good for me, but what is namespace? LxdeQt, LXDEQt, > LxQt or what? > In lxqt-settings prototype it's currently LxQt::, which I personally like - it's really like lxqt- prefix for everything else. Though lxqt:: namespace is good as well. (lowercase c++ style) > 5. @Kuzma IMHO razor-global-key-shortcuts-client and > razor-global-key-shortcut-selector is madness, let's use some like > lxqt-shortcuts-client and lxqt-shortcuts-selector. > Ok. It's good time to rename them now. > > > -- > Best regards, > Alexander. > |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-08-08 16:19:46
|
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:14 AM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> wrote: > We forget about maintainers. Shared repository complicate the creation of > ebuilds and PKGBUILDs. > > Of cose we can make a separate repository like lxqt-sdk, it will contain a > some scripts to facilitate the lifo of the developers (like checkLicense.sh > and astyle-razorqt.sh). Also we can put the script clone-and-build-all. But > this repository should be optional. > > 2013/8/8 Ben <yn...@gm...> >> >> On 8 August 2013 22:48, Jerome Leclanche <ad...@gm...> wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 7:18 AM, chr...@su... >> > <chr...@su...> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> 2013/8/7 Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> >> >>> >> >>> To have common repo is not a good idea. User should to have ability to >> >>> clone repo and build application, without any additional steps. But if >> >>> we >> >>> have several related repositories, for building user must to create >> >>> directory structure with predefined names, and clone the repositories >> >>> in >> >>> them. >> >>> >> >> >> >> I don't think having a common repo for build tools is worse than having >> >> a >> >> common library you need to build and run the modules. And I think there >> >> is a >> >> difference between what goes into the library (all users of lxqt need >> >> this) >> >> and what goes into the build-tool-repo (lxqt developers need this). >> >> >> >> But I can live with putting everything common in a library module, if >> >> people prefer this. >> > >> > >> > Don't really see the point. Build tools are just build tools; they >> > should go >> > in the main repo and be used to bootstrap everything, imho. They're here >> > to >> > help developers, we don't distribute them to users... arguing over it is >> > just going to waste the time we'd save with them ;) >> >> Then what's the point of having separate repos for each lib or >> application, if they are not buildable on their own? >> >> As downstream packager I'd really appreciate it if each repo/lib/app >> had its own makefiles, without needing to bootstrap anything else. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Ben | yngwin >> Gentoo developer > Best regards, > Alexander. I think the solution is easy. Create a repo which contains the latest razor cmake modules and scripts. For every component, just copy the required cmake modules. That's what I did with libsysstat. It now can be built independently. https://github.com/lxde/libsysstat As you can see, it only uses create_pkgconfig_file.cmake and don't need other modules. The only drawback is, if we improve some cmake modules later, the other copies in every repos will be out of sync. This is a rare case, though, and it's still easy to fix. Just using the find command to find out all repo using that cmake module, and copy the latest version to them. They don't necessarily need the new cmake module if they already work well, though. So I see no problems here. |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-08-08 16:29:00
|
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> wrote: > I slitted it too, but witout Qt5 support. Oops, seems that people are doing the same work at the same time. Will it be better to start a page documenting that who is working on which part so we don't do duplicated work or create git conflicts? Can we use hackpad, google doc, or a wiki page for this purpose? > Who knows, can and merge changes from repositories with such different > history? Or better to split the changes by hand? > > > 2013/8/8 Luís Pereira <lui...@gm...> >> >> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 6:53 AM, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: >> > By the time of this writing, I just did more split. >> > Here is a list: >> > libraries/qtxdg => libqtxdg >> > libraries/razor => liblxqt >> > libraries/razormount => liblxqt-mount >> > libraries/sysstat => libsysstat >> >> libqtxdg was already split at: >> https://github.com/luis-pereira/qtxdg >> >> and working >> -- >> Luís Pereira >> > Best regards, > Alexander. > |
From: Luther G. Lu F. <el...@ya...> - 2013-08-08 16:53:53
|
Think Github has wiki and issues that may be used. >________________________________ > From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> >To: "raz...@go..." <raz...@go...>; lxde-list <Lxd...@li...> >Sent: Friday, August 9, 2013 12:28 AM >Subject: Re: [Lxde-list] [razor-qt] I tried to split razor-qt repos into smaller ones > > >On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> wrote: >> I slitted it too, but witout Qt5 support. > >Oops, seems that people are doing the same work at the same time. >Will it be better to start a page documenting that who is working on >which part so we don't do duplicated work or create git conflicts? > >Can we use hackpad, google doc, or a wiki page for this purpose? > >> Who knows, can and merge changes from repositories with such different >> history? Or better to split the changes by hand? >> >> >> 2013/8/8 Luís Pereira <lui...@gm...> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 6:53 AM, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: >>> > By the time of this writing, I just did more split. >>> > Here is a list: >>> > libraries/qtxdg => libqtxdg >>> > libraries/razor => liblxqt >>> > libraries/razormount => liblxqt-mount >>> > libraries/sysstat => libsysstat >>> >>> libqtxdg was already split at: >>> https://github.com/luis-pereira/qtxdg >>> >>> and working >>> -- >>> Luís Pereira >>> >> Best regards, >> Alexander. >> > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite! >It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production. >Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. >Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. >http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897031&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk >_______________________________________________ >Lxde-list mailing list >Lxd...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lxde-list > > > |
From: <chr...@su...> - 2013-08-08 17:21:09
|
2013/8/8 PCMan <pcm...@gm...> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:18 AM, Александр Соколов <sok...@gm...> > wrote: > > I slitted it too, but witout Qt5 support. > > Oops, seems that people are doing the same work at the same time. > Will it be better to start a page documenting that who is working on > which part so we don't do duplicated work or create git conflicts? > > Can we use hackpad, google doc, or a wiki page for this purpose? > > Until we get an issuetracker I'd suggest just a wiki page with a table listing the components/modules and who will be working on them. br. Chr. > > Who knows, can and merge changes from repositories with such different > > history? Or better to split the changes by hand? > > > > > > 2013/8/8 Luís Pereira <lui...@gm...> > >> > >> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 6:53 AM, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > >> > By the time of this writing, I just did more split. > >> > Here is a list: > >> > libraries/qtxdg => libqtxdg > >> > libraries/razor => liblxqt > >> > libraries/razormount => liblxqt-mount > >> > libraries/sysstat => libsysstat > >> > >> libqtxdg was already split at: > >> https://github.com/luis-pereira/qtxdg > >> > >> and working > >> -- > >> Luís Pereira > >> > > Best regards, > > Alexander. > > > > -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Razor-qt" group. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/razor-qt?hl=en > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Razor-qt" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to raz...@go.... > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > |