liquidshell in kdereview

[Martin Koller]

On Donnerstag, 9. November 2017 15:32:46 CET Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 7. November 2017, 20:08:59 CET schrieb Martin Koller:
> > On Dienstag, 7. November 2017 16:42:40 CET Martin Flöser wrote:
> > > Am 2017-11-03 21:30, schrieb Martin Koller:
> > > I don't mind what you develop in your spare time. Not at all. What I
> > > mind is if a product is added to KDE as a competitor/replacement to a
> > > product I work on because of misunderstood things. What I see here is
> > > that you completely misunderstood what hardware acceleration means and
> > > gives to the system.
> > 
> > See above. I did not start liquidshell because I was bored. Believe me, I
> > have other hobbies. I started it just because I got fed up with the
> > problems I had with plasmashell and I need to use some DE for my daily
> > work. Restarting plasmashell multiple times a day is just not funny.
> 
> I think what Martin F. is also asking here, and what surely one expects as 
> standard in KDE, is that the description of the liquidshell product/project is 
> not making false or unresearched claims

I did not make false or unresearched claims.
QPainter, wich is the base for drawing in QWidgets, is - AFAIK - not using
hardware acceleration.
At least inside Qt. Martin F. just explained that deep down in the graphics
stack there is still acceleration used, but that was not my point.

> or speaking badly about alternative solutions, especially from the same community.
> In short: being respectful :)
> So e.g. if this was about some new liquidhexeditor, I as author of Okteta 
> would be not happy about phrases like:
> 
> * "liquidhexeditor is a replacement for okteta"
> "replacement" (to me) comes with meaning of successor, being better. Which is 
> attributing things.
> The more neutral word "alternative" might be better here.

will change

> * "It does not use QtQuick but instead relies on QtWidgets."
> "not use X but relies on Y" also tells me that "X" sucks and better is 
> avoided.
> Where one could rather say "Uses X for everything because property 1, property 
> 2 and property 3", without losing a word about "Y".  Just listing the factors 
> one made their choice on for using "X" leaves everyone with their idea about 
> the qualities of "Y".
> E.g. it could be said that QWidgets are a stable mature UI technology and 
> (like already is sayed) provide a consistent UI across shell and apps (at 
> least the QWidget-based apps).
> No need to speak here about alternatives like QQ, Gtk, or EFL, there are 
> people for any who think that to be a better base to build a UI on.

the major difference between plasmashell and liquidshell IS the non-usage of QtQuick, therefore
it definitely needs to be mentioned.
That does not imply judgement. It's just an explanation of what technology
it uses and which it does not - given that these are the two major
possibilities from Qt.
I have adjusted the README
 
<snip>

> BTW, you are surely aware that other UI components of the Plasma workspace, 
> like the System Settings, are ported to QtQuick currently. So given your 
> implementation choices, do you plan to create a liquidsystemsettings variant 
> as well?

not planned

-- 
Best regards/Schöne Grüße

Martin
A: Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion
Q: Why is top posting bad?

()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail 
/\                        - against proprietary attachments

Geschenkideen, Accessoires, Seifen, Kulinarisches: www.lillehus.at