KCM rename

[Frans Englich]

I think the rename is sensible, but there's just one thing: porting will 
require a lot of work. There are many files which are named "kcmsomething.
{cpp,h}" so one would have to rename files too. I really loathe when someone 
tries to hinder what is the correct thing to do because it would require an 
effort. So, I'm not saying this is a reason to not do it, I'm just mentioning 
it.

On Wednesday 19 July 2006 09:02, Matthias Kretz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as KCModule and friends are not bound to KControl anymore I believe a
> rename of the classes is in order. In Trysil Aaron and Ben said to call
> everything KSettings:
> KCModule -> KSettingsModule or KSettingsPlugin

I think I prefer "Module" here. "Plugin" would be more a focus on what it 
physically is, as opposed the semantical part(that it is settings 
modularized).

> KCModuleInfo -> KSettingsInfo(rmation)
> KCModuleProxy -> KSettingsWidget
> KCMultiDialog -> KSettingsDialog
> KSettings::Dialog -> KSettingsDialog
> KSettings::CompontentsDialog -> KSettingsDialog
> KCModuleContainer -> KSettings(Module|Plugin)Container
> Another obvious name would be to use Config, but KConfig is already taken.
> I'm not satisfied with the name change yet and before I'd tackle such a
> drastic change I'd like to hear some more opinions.

That Qt has QSettings, as Molketin mentions, I find a bit worrying. It is an 
invite for future trouble. Perhaps "Settings" can be replaced with "Options"? 
KOptionsModule, and so on.


Cheers,

		Frans