Ruby Plasma Tutorial

[Dominik Haumann]

On Sunday 18 January 2009, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> On Sunday 18 January 2009, Niels Slot wrote:
> > In the last week I've written a Plasma tutorial for Ruby. In the
> > tutorial the reader creates a simple but functional applet using
> > widgets and Ruby. I've put it on a personal subpage on Techbase[1]. I
> > would like to ask for some feedback. I've got one and a half years of
> > Ruby experience, but I'm quite new with programming Plasma.
> >
> > I've also seen the new Python tutorial, they look really nice. I'd be
> > willing to help 'translate' these to Ruby. When doing this, it would be
> > nice to have a way to share some pieces of the Python tutorials. The
> > parts about, for example, installing plasmoids, metadata.desktop and
> > using the eningeexplorer, are the same for any scripting language. Can
> > we come up with some way to share these texts while not confusing the
> > reader?
>
> packaging is 99% shared between all native plasma components (applets,
> dataengines, etc).
>
> a tutorial that essentially takes this page:
>
> 	http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/Plasma/Package
>
> and/or the content in your tutorial and makes a little article out of it
> for publication on techbase.kde.org's tutorials page would be perfect. in
> fact, we probably want four (short) tutorials on packages: intro to
> packages, creating a package, using a package, defining custom package
> structures.
>
> the intro should probably start with the relationship between Packages
> and PackageStructures and cover the plasmapkg tool.
>
> creating a package could have five small sections: the metadata.desktop
> file, plasmoids, dataengines, runners and wallpapers.
>
> using a package would look at the API of Package and how to use it in
> your code effectively.
>
> custom packages would look at the ways to create a PackageStructure (the
> .desktop file to register it as a service and then either a .desktop file
> describing the structure or a c++ plugin)
>
> all of these would be pretty short, really, and woud make nice bit-size
> bits to work through.

I 100% agree, especially on the word 'short'. :) Better have more short 
tutorials than one looong one. So moving e.g. packaing to a separate page 
makes a whole lot of sense to me.

Dominik