D29292: Port KKeySequenceItem to QQC2

[Kai Uwe Broulik]

broulik added inline comments.

INLINE COMMENTS

> davidedmundson wrote in KeySequenceItem.qml:57
> > Can we use the non-attached version here please since it's not likely
> 
> It's the worst!
> 
> > Are we able to use some form of units? Hardcoding this seems wrong.
> 
> It's come up before, this isn't ideal, but there's no other consistent alternative. It's the convention followed elsewhere.
> 
> Let's follow that up on https://phabricator.kde.org/T10873

Why is it the worst? It keeps us from having to hardcode magic numbers.

> davidedmundson wrote in KeySequenceItem.qml:58
> We need to specify the domain, but you're right i18nd would work just as well and save a QObject

Assuming `i18n` is always available? Maybe should stick to `qsTr`

REPOSITORY
  R296 KDeclarative

REVISION DETAIL
  https://phabricator.kde.org/D29292

To: davidedmundson, #plasma, davidre
Cc: cblack, broulik, kde-frameworks-devel, LeGast00n, michaelh, ngraham, bruns
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20200430/716422c8/attachment.html>