kcontrol empty

[David Faure]

On Friday 02 February 2007, Matthias Kretz wrote:
> On Friday 02 February 2007 15:08, Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 02:57:51PM +0100, David Faure wrote:
> > > I also think that kubuntu's systemsettings would make a much better user
> > > interface than the treeview approach. But that's orthogonal I guess, we
> > > need to locate the services before we can change the way they are
> > > presented. Which makes me wonder how systemsettings works: does it
> > > hardcode which modules to show and where, or does it use the desktop
> > > files for that.
> >
> > It uses an XDG menu file just as kcontrol does, but with different
> > categories.
> 
> OK, since KCMs are now installed as services we need a new way to define the 
> hierarchy 
Yes. Maybe simply a group name in the desktop file? Systemsettings uses a one-level hierarchy afaics,
so that should be enough.

> (or can the XDG menu be adapted somehow to work for services?) 
No. And I don't think we would want that anyway. The whole point of moving the desktop files
to services is to become independent from the XDG menu. In kde3 when you edit your menu
you can lose some or all of your kcontrol tree, that's no good.

> As I've written something like that before for settings dialogs perhaps we can 
> reuse that? See 
> http://api.kde.org/cvs-api/kdelibs-apidocs/kutils/html/namespaceKSettings.html 
> (especially 4. The .setdlg file for hierarchical (TreeList) page layouts).
If we are fine with a one-level hierarchy then another file to install per module seems overkill.

-- 
David Faure, faure at kde.org, sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).