Review Request 126516: Add StatusNotifier flag

[Kai Uwe Broulik]

> On Dez. 27, 2015, 6:18 nachm., David Edmundson wrote:
> > Ship It!
> 
> Kai Uwe Broulik wrote:
>     I'll put this on hold until we decided whether we want DrKonqi vs SNI (what this review is about) or Desktop Notification vs SNI (my second approach, in which case the flag should probably be named diferently (PassiveNotification or something like that) as we'll get an SNI either way)

So, should I rename it? StatusNotifier doesn't really fit anymore.


- Kai Uwe


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126516/#review90164
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Dez. 25, 2015, 4:24 nachm., Kai Uwe Broulik wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126516/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Dez. 25, 2015, 4:24 nachm.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE Frameworks.
> 
> 
> Repository: kcrash
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> This adds a StatusNotifier flag that starts DrKonqi with the --passive argument introduced in Review 126515
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/kcrash.cpp 7d3b8a2 
>   src/kcrash.h e2b59f2 
> 
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/126516/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Works.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kai Uwe Broulik
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20151227/5dee1ee6/attachment.html>