Web Shortcuts KCM

[David Faure]

On Friday 18 July 2014 00:37:02 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> On Thursday 17 July 2014 10:37:45 David Faure wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 July 2014 22:05:21 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 16 July 2014 10:33:43 David Faure wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 15 July 2014 15:16:20 Kevin Ottens wrote:
> > > > >  (ie at most a
> > > > > 
> > > > > widget would be enough for the app related settings, we should talk
> > > > > to
> > > > > the
> > > > > underlying platform for the other ones).
> > > > 
> > > > I don't want users to have to configure their search engines in 10 KDE
> > > > apps
> > > > one after the other by hand.
> > > > A centralized configuration is much more convenient.
> > > 
> > > Maybe I was unclear, but I didn't mean to imply that for something like
> > > the
> > > web shortcuts having a centralized configuration was wrong. I think that
> > > shipping a KCM is wrong. But I'm fine with a widget which provide mean
> > > to
> > > save in a centralized configuration.
> > 
> > OK, then what is the difference with making that widget inherit from
> > KCModule so that it's also available in systemsettings - as long as the
> > applications also show that KCModule directly in the application, like
> > konqueror does when you use "Configure Konqueror" ?
> 
> In the general case, as a potential pattern (I'm not thinking KIO only) it'd
> mean bringing a dependency on KConfigWidgets.
> In the case of KIO it's less of a concern since the dependency is already
> there. But it means bringing dependencies on the auth system and
> KCMModuleProxy, on the buttons, on about data, on KConfigDialogManager. To
> me it shouts forcing all that on user code even when not needed.

Then let's go more "bare bones" in frameworks that can't afford the 
KConfigWidgets dependency, but let's provide the more convenient and more 
usable "out of the box" solution in frameworks that can provide it, such as 
KIO?

-- 
David Faure, faure at kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
Working on KDE Frameworks 5