Review Request: [Quicklaunch] Refactoring, layout fixes and a drag & drop marker.

[Ingomar Wesp]

You wrote:
>>> ! And I noticed that multiple row support is gone at the moment it seems
>>> :/
>> 
>> Multiple row support should work (unless you ran into a bug), but new
>> rows are created only when there is enough space to fit the
>> user-configurable icon size for each row. For an icon size of 32px, this
>> means that the height of the panel needs to be at  least 64px for two
>> rows to be shown.
> 
> Yes, well I was testing in the plasmoidviewer... maybe that was the
> problem...

Ok, maybe I could have done a better job at describing the way the layouting 
works in the patch right now:

When in a vertical panel or on the desktop (formFactor() != horizontal), the 
grid tries to create as many columns as possible and will only wrap to 
multiple rows if the horizontal space is not enough to hold all icons at their 
preferred size (AND there is enough vertical space to accomodate multiple rows 
at the icon size set by the user).

When placed on a horizontal panel, the grid tries to maximize the number of 
rows instead.

The reasoning is that you usually want the applet to make use of the vertical 
space on horizontal panels (multiple rows) or horizontal space on vertical 
panels (multiple columns), but you don't want it to create multiple rows / 
columns if this would mean that the icons are displayed smaller than you 
configured them to be.

The fact that this discussion exists is probably proof enough that we need to 
change the way creation of columns / rows are configured by the user.

In my opinion we should follow the example set by the task bar configuration, 
where the user basically sets the maximum number of rows (on horizontal 
panels) / the maximum number of columns (on vertical panels) with the option 
to force them if he doesn't like the default size at which wrapping takes 
place.

Max rows / max columns would be the same setting, just with a different label 
depending on the formFactor() of the applet. 

This suggestion would remove the need (and the ability) to set the icon size 
altogether. We would have to define some default row height at which wrapping 
takes place, but the user would be able to override it by setting "force 
number of rows"...

Please tell me what you think.

So long,
Ingomar