a new library

[Boudewijn Rempt]

On Wednesday 19 December 2012 Dec, C. Boemann wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 December 2012 13:26:33 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
> > On 19 December 2012 13:19, C. Boemann <cbo at boemann.dk> wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 19 December 2012 13:11:51 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
> > >> On 19 December 2012 12:59, C. Boemann <cbo at boemann.dk> wrote:
> > >> > Yes i'm not attached to alpine in any way. I couldn't come up with a
> > >> > generic name that describes the library very well ( and no flaketools
> > >> > doesn't unless we wan to have many such similarly named libraries) and
> > >> > so when i wrote the mail that was just a codename that sprung to mind.
> > >> 
> > >> After re-reading your initial post, how about: basictools or
> > >> generictools?
> > > 
> > > but since it may grow to hold shapes and dockers too i would find
> > > something named tools misleading
> > 
> > APIs for tools, shapes and dockers are defined in libflake, right? So
> > how about basicflake or basicflakes?
> i was toying with flakebasics but was scared it might sound like something flake 
> depended on
> 
> now with basicflakes it's much better


Well, flake would depend on this library, wouldn't it? I'd call it flakebase.

Btw, I tried the distribute-the-widgets idea this morning, and it turns out that most of the stuff would get into koodf, which isn't that good an idea. I thought I could put most into komain, with only some things in flake, kotext and koodf, but it doesn't work that way because the shadow thingy (for instance) uses a lot of kowidgets widgets. That problem would still occur when moving those widgets to flake.



-- 
Boudewijn Rempt
http://www.valdyas.org, http://www.krita.org, http://www.boudewijnrempt.nl