Absolutely awesome plasmoid idea: the playlist itself

[Seb Ruiz]

Please use the mailing list.

2009/1/8 Robert Smits <bob at rsmits.ca>:
> On January 7, 2009 04:41:09 pm you wrote:
>> 2009/1/8 Robert Smits <bob at rsmits.ca>:
>> > You see, Henry, I think plasmoids suck. I'd rather not have any feature
>> > of Amarok, which I really really like depend on bling from KDE4 to work.
>>
>> What difference does it make to you, as a user, what container or how
>> the functionality is exposed to you?
>
> It doesn't make any difference unless I have to use KDE4 to use amarok.
>
>> Does the term "plasmoid" unnerve
>> you and make you feel that it may be unstable?
>
> Frankly, yes. I don't know very much about them, but I do know I don't like
> what I've seen of the KDE4 desktop. I can do without rotating 3d desktops,
> etc.

Well then you should do some reading up on what a plasmoid actually
is. As a user, it's nothing more than a container that can be placed
in multiple locations (on the desktop, in the panel). To a developer,
it exposes a lot of functionality which makes the development process
less painful (opinions may vary). Amarok plasmoids are totally
distinct and separate from what you imagine to be the KDE4 desktop
plasmoids. They are not mix-and-matchable. Aside from the theme and
colours, my KDE4 desktop looks and functions quite similarly to KDE3.

>
>> > I don't care about which libraries I need installed, I just don't want
>> > the only option for my playlist to be in a plasmoid. It would be fine
>> > with me if you make it an option I can refuse, but I'd like to be able to
>> > use Amarok2 in KDE3.
>>
>> Once again, what difference does it make? You can use Amarok 2 within
>> KDE3 regardless of whether we use plasmoids in our application or not
>> (which we are).
>
> That's what I really care about. As long as I can continue to use Amarok 2 in
> KDE3, I'll be happy.

And you'll be using plasmoids, and you may not even know about it ;).


-- 
Seb Ruiz

http://www.sebruiz.net/
http://amarok.kde.org/