IconTasks taskmanager changes

[Jan Gerrit José Marker]

On Thursday 27 October 2011 14:10:50 Craig Drummond wrote:
[snip]
> No, just to now allow it. And for the user to be prompted to locate the
> launcher.
> > > I cant imagine many people pinning kcm's.
> > 
> > yes, it's an edge case for certain. would be nice if it works, all the
> > same.
> 
> But, is it worth adding work-arounds for such an edge case? Why bloat the
> code with something that is unlikely to occur? At least I dont see it as a
> blocker for the current implementation, just maybe a TODO for later.

You don't want the code to be bloated because of covering each corner-case. 
Maybe that you can add a plug-in structure (later) that would delegate the 
matching to different per application plug-ins. So there would be different 
plug-ins (in the best case they would be scripts) e.g. for Wine, the KCM 
shells, LibreOffice etc. which would try to find a desktop file, create one if 
necessary, in the case of telepathy they could even stop the matching and say 
"No, this application should not be pinned" (see the email from David 
Edmundson) or do nothing if they would not know what to do. After asking the 
plug-ins the library would use the current matching (could be in a separate 
plug-in which is executed last, though) and would finally ask the user about a 
desktop file. Using Synchrotron the plug-ins could be shipped and updated 
easily to work with new or changed applications.
That would prevent from bloating the code and would make the matching more 
flexible.

> > > In fact the current taskbar is broken for these, as kcmshell
> > > is pinned - but you cannot start this byitself. So, it creates a
> > 
> > launcher
> > 
> > > that does nothing.
> > 
> > yes, we've covered that there are problems with the current implementation
> > in
> > the tasks widget. i'm interested in solutions we can implement next, not
> > repeatedly saying "we do know that the current implementation in that
> > widget
> > is broken, right?" :)
> 
> My point was to show that whilst the IconTask implementation is not perfect,
> it already works better then the current one. With the one caveat of the
> embedded launcher details. But it does not have that, as it prompts the
> user to specify the launcher. I agree this prompting should only be at the
> very last resort - and for the vast majority of cases it is not needed.
> 
> Craig.