Review Request 108598: Create the new types enum - Important please review !

[Dan Vrátil]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108598/#review26297
-----------------------------------------------------------



KTp/types.h
<http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108598/#comment20018>

    I know that in my email I was against killing these roles, but back then I didn't realize we can use KTp::Presence instread of Tp::Presence.
    
    If we modify KTp::Presence to be QML friendly (being QObject and using Q_PROPERTY), we can kill all the ContactPresence*Roles.
    
    However that would mean making KTp::Presence a QObject. And I don't know whether that makes any sense at all...up to you, just an idea.



KTp/types.h
<http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108598/#comment20016>

    Explain this role please



KTp/types.h
<http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108598/#comment20017>

    Your English is weird :D



KTp/types.h
<http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108598/#comment20015>

    CustomRole = Qt::UserRole + 4000


I have some doubts about the heading roles, but I can't quite put my finger on it...maybe later.

- Dan Vrátil


On Jan. 26, 2013, 2:33 p.m., David Edmundson wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108598/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 26, 2013, 2:33 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Telepathy.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Create the new types enum.
> 
> This is really important. Please please review. 
> Give a "ship it!" if you're happy with the enum. I will only push into the model_refactor_3 branch.
> 
> Obviously this won't compile, I want to make sure people are happy with this _before_ we start changing all the other code. We can add roles later, but I don't want to be editing or deleting them. 
> 
> I'm also not sure whether I should namespace the enum so we don't have roles at the top level of the KTp namespace?  (i.e namespace KTp { namespace ContactModelRoles { enum ModelRoles{ .....  ) ? Thoughts?
> 
> (what's not shown in the diff is that I've also deleted/merged the ktp-metatypes.h file)
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   KTp/CMakeLists.txt 10c17bf1f915db9fed59f2d11421cb73a38cebae 
>   KTp/Models/accounts-tree-proxy-model.cpp ead34f6a1b019535caeb77e05eb7332e71d82f5c 
>   KTp/Models/contacts-filter-model.cpp 145dcef38593edc10d1efb3f6dc5e188723ecc8e 
>   KTp/Models/contacts-list-model.h 876a485a65eacad7fa8663dd7c221f52c1ae7ff1 
>   KTp/Models/contacts-model.h 2a9cf44736e6e3aea5f92eb09e6840314ba94247 
>   KTp/ktp-metatypes.h 9488ee5cbe059d831466b1a1115e2ff359457bac 
>   KTp/types.h PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/108598/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> David Edmundson
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-telepathy/attachments/20130128/5569d046/attachment.html>