----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107332/#review22024 -----------------------------------------------------------
Good catch, things looks more aligned now. I am a bit worried about the 2px value being specific to Oxygen widget style though. How does it behave with other styles? Maybe you can extract this value using QStyle::pixelMetric(QStyle::PM_DefaultFrameWidth)? kdeui/tests/kmessagewidgettest.cpp <http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107332/#comment16949> I am actually wondering whether the setFrameStyle() call is needed at all. Do you get a different result without it? - Aurélien Gâteau On Nov. 15, 2012, 6:40 a.m., David Edmundson wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107332/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Nov. 15, 2012, 6:40 a.m.) > > > Review request for kdelibs and Aurélien Gâteau. > > > Description > ------- > > Fix margin on KMessageWidget to match that used by a styled QFrame. > > The rationale being that in almost every usage of KMessageWidget it's used > above a sunken QFrame (kate, kmail, dolphin) > currently the message widget is slight wider, which looks wrong. > > Updated testing code to match the more common usage. > > > Diffs > ----- > > kdeui/tests/kmessagewidgettest.cpp be517fce802a8594a6d4aae50f0d1c8955d3cbf2 > kdeui/widgets/kmessagewidget.cpp b87b3e49e9824c068bd1d85ac7ecb2de337fa86b > > Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107332/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Screenshot shows the difference, look at left hand side of message widget > lining up with the frame below. > Also opened in Kate, KMail, Bluetooth KCM, ktp-accounts-kcm. All instances > lined up. > > > Screenshots > ----------- > > Original KMessageWidget (left) and improved KMessageWidget (right) > http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/107332/s/833/ > > > Thanks, > > David Edmundson > >
