1_4 laundry list

Bernd Gehrmann bernd at physik.hu-berlin.de
Tue Jun 19 08:35:42 UTC 2001

On Mon, 18 Jun 2001, Roland Krause wrote:

> --- Bernd Gehrmann <bernd at physik.hu-berlin.de> wrote:
> > Just had a look at the 1_4 branch and was very disappointed.
> Why are you disappointed? What did you expect? I dont quite understand
> this attitude. 

Which attitude are kdevelop users supposed to have? That features
which worked over two years suddenly stop working with no reason? 

> > Somehow I have the impression it gets more and more bugs with
> > each release :-((
> What release have you tried? There wasnt any recently, afaik, and
> KDEVELOP_1_4 did have a lot of problems, that's fairly well known. 

A lot of problems that 1.1 did not have.

> > * Class properties dialog: No way to enable the help button. 
> >   The dialog offers to create public signals; something 
> >   like a public signal simply doesn't exist. It's unclear
> >   what 'matching slots' in the slot tab are. Match what?
> >   Also, the dialog is a usability desaster: no accelerators,
> >   no initial focus, nested group boxes, messed up focus
> >   chains.
> These are _old_ bugs, that are in KDevelop since ancient times, mostly
> design mistakes, half finished projects and some things are simply not
> possible without any kind of a data structure behind an application. 

According to the webcvs, this dialog was added 5 months ago. 
I would not call that ancient. If it's a half-finished project,
then it shouldn't be included in a stable release.
> > * Adding translations to Qt projects spits a lot of errors.
> >   IMO, the tr support in the template is pointless anyway,
> >   as it only works if you start the application in the
> >   source directory.
> > 
> > * Documentation browser options seem to have no effect on
> >   the documentation browser.
> > 
> > * Lots of 'QObject::connect: No such slot' messages on the
> >   console.
> Where, which one, examples would really help here. 

IIRC, the first was an xml parsing error. For the second, I don't
see which kind of example you mean: no changes in the options
dialog have _any_ effect on the browser. For the third, webcvs
shows me that a menu item is connected to a slot with parameters  
help->insertItem(SmallIconSet("idea"),i18n("Tip of the Day"), this,
SLOT(slotHelpTipOfDay(bool)), 0, ID_HELP_TIP_OF_DAY);

> If you would get this kind of bug report, you wouldnt even read it to
> the end... 

That's not true. I accurately read each bug report I get to the end
and try to reproduce bugs. If I can't reproduce them, I ask back
to get more context. I have always understood bug reports as a
chance to improve my code, not as a malicious conspiracy by users.


to unsubscribe from this list send an email to kdevelop-devel-request at kdevelop.org with the following body:
unsubscribe »your-email-address«

More information about the KDevelop-devel mailing list