a new library

[C. Boemann]

On Wednesday 19 December 2012 14:42:33 Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> 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.
no "flakebase" will depend on flake and on widgets

well unless you want to rename flake to flakebase and make a new flake - not 
really liking that either

> 
> 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.
yes it's a real bowl of spaghetti :(