Approach for port to KF5

[Andrew Lake]

After flailing around trying to figure out how to update the mailing list
on reviewboard, I gave up and submitted a sysadmin ticket to do it. So
hopefully that'll be resolved soon. :-)

As for the platform and architecture discussion, please don't wait for my
input/permission to do anything. You guys have a free hand to do whatever
makes sense. I'll focus most of my efforts on the UI design and
implementation. If you need anything from me to support your efforts just
let me know. Like I said, it won't be possible for me to have my hand in
every pot so consider this my green flag to have at it.

Much respect,
Andrew

On Mon Nov 03 2014 at 9:56:17 AM Andrew Lake <jamboarder at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ok, I went ahead and updated the project site. I've been looking for a way
> to change the reviewboard group mailing list but I couldn't find it. I'll
> submit a sysadmin ticket.
>
> Andrew
>
> On Mon Nov 03 2014 at 7:09:09 AM Eshton Robateau <2607922181 at qq.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Looks great so far. I think Andrew has the admin rights to the website
>> and reviewboard so he should be able to handle that.
>> Also remember to CC bangarang at kde.org so message goes to mailing list.
>>
>>
>> ------------------ Original ------------------
>> *From: * "Stefan Burnicki";<stefan.burnicki at burnicki.net>;
>> *Date: * Nov 3, 2014
>> *To: * "Eshton Robateau"<2607922181 at qq.com>;
>> *Subject: * Re: Approach for port to KF5
>>
>> Am 01.11.2014 um 02:50 schrieb Eshton Robateau:
>>
>> > I'm on board with the new directory/branch approach. Although I don't
>> > have much experience with QML, I prefer the idea of exporting
>> > MediaItemModel (and any other needed models)  as a extension, it would
>> > allow a more dynamic approach to be taken in the UI designs.
>> > In terms of porting classes, it makes better sense to start from the
>> > lowest level of the architecture (i.e the listengine hierarchy) before
>> > porting other classes. This would allow us to see how much of the
>> > above architecture needs serious redesign or rewriting.  Logically,
>> > next would be MediaItemModel and any other models, followed by the
>> > playlist class; the infofetchers, search infrastructure and storage
>> > are details that cannot be tackled until a minimal port is in place.
>> >
>>
>> This seems reasonable to me. Maybe I will think about the architecture
>> and do a little graph/chart for us to agree on.
>>
>> >
>> > ------------------ Original ------------------
>> > *From: * "Andrew Lake";<jamboarder at gmail.com>;
>> > *Send time:* Saturday, Nov 1, 2014 0:57 AM
>> > *To:* "Stefan Burnicki"<stefan.burnicki at burnicki.net>;
>> > "bangarang"<bangarang at kde.org>;
>> > *Subject: * Re: Approach for port to KF5
>>
>> >
>> > Start with the platform stuff and write unit tests as we go. Stefan
>> > would you be willing to take the KF5 branch and set it up to start
>> > clean like you described?
>> Online in the review board. We should change that the review EMail
>> doesn't get send to the old googlegroups mailing list, but to the new
>> one instead.
>> You will find only a minimal main.cpp for now,probably with outdated
>> KAboutData, just needed something to test the new CMake build stuff.
>>
>> Also, we need to update the project site, since the "post-review" tool
>> is obsolete and replaced by "rbt post", but I don't think I have
>> privilege to do so.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bangarang mailing list
>> Bangarang at kde.org
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/bangarang
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/bangarang/attachments/20141107/08a675bd/attachment.html>