Matthew Woehlke mw_triad at users.sourceforge.net
Sat Sep 15 20:47:24 BST 2007

Thomas Zander wrote:
> first thank you for writing an email that opens a dialog, this is still 
> KDE and you are just as much part of our community as this kde-oldy. 
> Respect for each others work and opinions comes first. :)

Thank you for responding in kind. I think as a result of high emotions 
on either side, we've wound up talking about different things, so I'll 
try to explain.

> On Saturday 15 September 2007 01:17:08 Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> 1. I gave you permission to "change the six lines of code that set the
>> defaults", not emasculate the StateEffects ctor making it impossible to
>> reasonably change the defaults should we decide to do that in the
>> future.
> 22:36 <ThomasZ> i.e. have you finished the [color inactive]  trial?
> 22:36 <mwoehlke> sure, I like it :-)
> 22:37 <ThomasZ> well, wait for the KCM to be finished so the rest of us 
> don't have to suffer :)
> 22:38 <mwoehlke> so go check in that change to kcolorscheme.cpp, I'm not 
> going to get into a pissing contest over it until the artists/u7y people 
> have spoken
> 22:38 <mwoehlke> but I also don't particularly care to change it myself 
> unless that's the decision of the aforementioned groups
> Hmm, I'm sorry I don't get you were Ok with only a 6-line change from the 
> above irc log :(

Ok, I think I can see why there is confusion. I apologize if I wasn't 
clear, but my expectation was that your changes would amount to changing 
some default values, not re-writing large chunks of my code. Finishing 
the quote...

[15:38:34] >mwoehlke< but I also don't particularly care to change it 
myself unless that's the decision of the aforementioned groups
[15:41:03] [ThomasZ] great, and the reversal of your patch doesn't 
cleanly apply. :?
[15:41:04] [ThomasZ] :/
[15:42:40] [ThomasZ] just don't complain when I break things by me 
removing large chunks of code.
[15:42:55] >mwoehlke< why do you need to remove large chunks of code?
[15:43:51] [ThomasZ] to remove the Inactive support.
[15:44:22] >mwoehlke< that's going to be an incredibly difficult task, 
you're going to break all of KDE trying
[15:44:38] >mwoehlke< or you could leave it in and change the six lines 
of code that set the defaults

...so I did say that I did not expect large changes.

> The fact that you like them to the extend you would  a) ok me changing it 
> and  b) revert it 30 seconds after I commit well, thats just not how we 
> do things in KDE.

Please look closer at what I actually did. Yes, I undid the unnecessary 
gutting that you did. What I did *not* revert is the defaults for the 
Inactive effects, which is what I was expecting you to change.

> Point in fact; the colors stuff is not your part of the KDE svn that you 
> rule in and can ignore everybodies opinion about.

Ok, but I hope you can understand that I'm not objecting to you changing 
the effects defaults, I'm objecting to you completely restructuring the 
code in the process, when it is not only unnecessary, but IMO makes the 
code less flexible.

>> So... do you mind not massively editing my code just to make it less
>> flexible?
> Yes, I mind.

Ok... I have to laugh at this, because...

> The code you want in there is to make all the widgets have a different 
> color when the window is inactive.  This is broken by design and KDE 
> should not provide a default that does this. (in fact, with the change I 
> made this is still done and still wrong, but at least its a step in the 
> right direction)

...your change is in fact a step in the wrong direction :-). Had you 
left things at "my revert" it would have been simple to fix this the way 
I think you want to. Instead, by making the code less flexible, you've 
prevented yourself from achieving this goal.

I won't reply to the rest of what you wrote because, as I hope I've made 
clear, I do not feel it has any bearing on this discussion.

(sorry, .sig file is on the other computer)

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list