Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

2014-06-21 11:45 GMT+02:00 David Faure :

> On Thursday 19 June 2014 17:07:49 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> > 2014-06-18 18:50 GMT+02:00 David Faure :
> > > On Wednesday 18 June 2014 16:27:43 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > in the last two months this thread has not been updated, so I assume
> > > > that
> > > > the Kronometer UI is ok.
> > > > What is still not clear is whether to move Kronometer in
> extragear-utils
> > >
> > > or
> > >
> > > > kdeutils and until this decision is not reached I can't file a
> sysadmin
> > > > request to exit from kdereview.
> > > >
> > > > At the moment, in this thread there is one "vote" for
> extragear-utils by
> > > > Albert and one for kdeutils by David.
> > > > There is another thread in kde-utils-devel list where there is
> another
> > >
> > > vote
> > >
> > > > for extragear-utils:
> > > >
> https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-utils-devel/2014-April/001110.html
> > >
> > > I don't mind either way, it makes very little difference in the end
> > > ("sudo zypper install kronometer", done)
> > >
> > > In fact the real question is what do *you* want: do you want it
> released
> > > automatically as part of the KDE SC, or do you want to make your own
> > > releases
> > > (more work for you, but you control when it's released).
> >
> > Well, what I really care for is packaging and translations, the release
> > schedule is secondary.
>
> It's not just about schedule, it's about who does the work.
>
> > I'm not sure how exactly extragear works. Let's say I choose to move
> > kronometer in extragear-utils: the many distros will automatically
> package
> > it?
>
> Yes, that's not where the difference is.
>
> > What about translations?
>
> No difference there either.
>
>
So I think extragear is enough for my requirements.


> The difference is: will you take care of doing regular releases of the code
> (versionning, packaging, uploading, etc. etc.). Or would you rather that
> this
> happens automatically for you whenever a KDE SC release comes out.
>
>
I think I am more familiar doing my own release schedule. Thank you for
explaining!


Thank you all for the comments during this review, it's been a pleasure.
In the next couple of days I will submit a ticket to move kronometer to
extragear-utils, unless there are further last minute comments.

Regards,
Elvis

--
> David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
> Working on KDE Frameworks 5
>
>

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[David Faure]

On Thursday 19 June 2014 17:07:49 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> 2014-06-18 18:50 GMT+02:00 David Faure :
> > On Wednesday 18 June 2014 16:27:43 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > in the last two months this thread has not been updated, so I assume
> > > that
> > > the Kronometer UI is ok.
> > > What is still not clear is whether to move Kronometer in extragear-utils
> > 
> > or
> > 
> > > kdeutils and until this decision is not reached I can't file a sysadmin
> > > request to exit from kdereview.
> > > 
> > > At the moment, in this thread there is one "vote" for extragear-utils by
> > > Albert and one for kdeutils by David.
> > > There is another thread in kde-utils-devel list where there is another
> > 
> > vote
> > 
> > > for extragear-utils:
> > > https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-utils-devel/2014-April/001110.html
> > 
> > I don't mind either way, it makes very little difference in the end
> > ("sudo zypper install kronometer", done)
> > 
> > In fact the real question is what do *you* want: do you want it released
> > automatically as part of the KDE SC, or do you want to make your own
> > releases
> > (more work for you, but you control when it's released).
> 
> Well, what I really care for is packaging and translations, the release
> schedule is secondary.

It's not just about schedule, it's about who does the work.

> I'm not sure how exactly extragear works. Let's say I choose to move
> kronometer in extragear-utils: the many distros will automatically package
> it? 

Yes, that's not where the difference is.

> What about translations?

No difference there either.

The difference is: will you take care of doing regular releases of the code 
(versionning, packaging, uploading, etc. etc.). Or would you rather that this 
happens automatically for you whenever a KDE SC release comes out.

-- 
David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
Working on KDE Frameworks 5

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Dimecres, 18 de juny de 2014, a les 18:50:12, David Faure va escriure:
> On Wednesday 18 June 2014 16:27:43 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> > Hello,
> > in the last two months this thread has not been updated, so I assume that
> > the Kronometer UI is ok.
> > What is still not clear is whether to move Kronometer in extragear-utils
> > or
> > kdeutils and until this decision is not reached I can't file a sysadmin
> > request to exit from kdereview.
> > 
> > At the moment, in this thread there is one "vote" for extragear-utils by
> > Albert and one for kdeutils by David.
> > There is another thread in kde-utils-devel list where there is another
> > vote
> > for extragear-utils:
> > https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-utils-devel/2014-April/001110.html
> 
> I don't mind either way, it makes very little difference in the end
> ("sudo zypper install kronometer", done)
> 
> In fact the real question is what do *you* want: 

No, that has never been the real question. It is a balance between what you 
want and what the community feels is "relevant". We've rejected various 
projects in the "main" modules because we felt they were too "use case 
specific".

Cheers,
  Albert

> do you want it released
> automatically as part of the KDE SC, or do you want to make your own
> releases (more work for you, but you control when it's released).

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

2014-06-18 18:50 GMT+02:00 David Faure :

> On Wednesday 18 June 2014 16:27:43 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> > Hello,
> > in the last two months this thread has not been updated, so I assume that
> > the Kronometer UI is ok.
> > What is still not clear is whether to move Kronometer in extragear-utils
> or
> > kdeutils and until this decision is not reached I can't file a sysadmin
> > request to exit from kdereview.
> >
> > At the moment, in this thread there is one "vote" for extragear-utils by
> > Albert and one for kdeutils by David.
> > There is another thread in kde-utils-devel list where there is another
> vote
> > for extragear-utils:
> > https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-utils-devel/2014-April/001110.html
>
> I don't mind either way, it makes very little difference in the end
> ("sudo zypper install kronometer", done)
>
> In fact the real question is what do *you* want: do you want it released
> automatically as part of the KDE SC, or do you want to make your own
> releases
> (more work for you, but you control when it's released).
>
>
Well, what I really care for is packaging and translations, the release
schedule is secondary.
I'm not sure how exactly extragear works. Let's say I choose to move
kronometer in extragear-utils: the many distros will automatically package
it? Or this is the case only for the software within KDE SC?
What about translations?

Thank you,
Elvis

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

Hello,
in the last two months this thread has not been updated, so I assume that
the Kronometer UI is ok.
What is still not clear is whether to move Kronometer in extragear-utils or
kdeutils and until this decision is not reached I can't file a sysadmin
request to exit from kdereview.

At the moment, in this thread there is one "vote" for extragear-utils by
Albert and one for kdeutils by David.
There is another thread in kde-utils-devel list where there is another vote
for extragear-utils:
https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-utils-devel/2014-April/001110.html

I'll wait for the final decision.

Best regards,
Elvis


2014-05-09 10:37 GMT+02:00 David Faure :

> On Monday 14 April 2014 01:06:54 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > Personally I don't see it being a broad enough use case to make sense to
> be
> > in  kdeutils. What do others think?
>
> I know that my wife was looking for such an application in KDE, to time
> meetings or phone calls, or as a bug reporter, to measure the time taken
> by a
> slow application to perform a given task. So this isn't just about sports
> (if
> one ignores the "lap" feature).
>
> -> I think it belongs to KDE SC (kdeutils).
>
> --
> David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
> Working on KDE Frameworks 5
>
>

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[David Faure]

On Wednesday 18 June 2014 16:27:43 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> Hello,
> in the last two months this thread has not been updated, so I assume that
> the Kronometer UI is ok.
> What is still not clear is whether to move Kronometer in extragear-utils or
> kdeutils and until this decision is not reached I can't file a sysadmin
> request to exit from kdereview.
> 
> At the moment, in this thread there is one "vote" for extragear-utils by
> Albert and one for kdeutils by David.
> There is another thread in kde-utils-devel list where there is another vote
> for extragear-utils:
> https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-utils-devel/2014-April/001110.html

I don't mind either way, it makes very little difference in the end
("sudo zypper install kronometer", done)

In fact the real question is what do *you* want: do you want it released 
automatically as part of the KDE SC, or do you want to make your own releases
(more work for you, but you control when it's released).

-- 
David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
Working on KDE Frameworks 5

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[David Faure]

On Monday 14 April 2014 01:06:54 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> Personally I don't see it being a broad enough use case to make sense to be
> in  kdeutils. What do others think?

I know that my wife was looking for such an application in KDE, to time 
meetings or phone calls, or as a bug reporter, to measure the time taken by a 
slow application to perform a given task. So this isn't just about sports (if 
one ignores the "lap" feature).

-> I think it belongs to KDE SC (kdeutils).

-- 
David Faure, fa...@kde.org, http://www.davidfaure.fr
Working on KDE Frameworks 5

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

Hi all,

2014-04-23 17:19 GMT+02:00 Elvis Angelaccio :

>
> 2014-04-23 14:28 GMT+02:00 Thomas Lübking :
>
> On Mittwoch, 23. April 2014 13:17:02 CEST, Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
>>
>>  I don't understand. Since there are only numbers I think that your point
>>> is
>>> already accomplished.
>>>
>> Nope.
>> To get monospace glyphs for sure, you must select a monospace font -
>> otherwise you're going by luck.
>>
>>  At least on my system
>>>
>> ;-)
>>
>>
>>  Have you found a particular font that doesn't look this way?
>>>
>> Hundreds - it's pretty common and the more "exotic" the fonts get
>> (script), the more obvious this becomes, but you may try Fontin [1],
>> Bitstream Handel Gothic [2], Adobe Jenson or Linotype Frutiger (latter are
>> commercial fonts, no link - sorry. I can send you screenshots of the fonts
>> though and some resellers will likely provide some as well) for some
>> "reasonable" choices.
>> In addition, the hinter and font size/weight can have impact.
>>
>>
> Oh my god, using these fonts the stopwatch display is an eyesore.
> Thanks for the explanation, this thing has to be fixed, sure as hell. I
> will try with different labels for each digit.
>

The problem now should be fixed. I've replaced QLabel with a custom widget
which uses a horizontal layout with a QLabel for each digit, adding proper
padding. The padding space is computed on the current font width (using
QFontMetrics). This should take into account most fonts, even if I've tried
only the fonts suggested by Thomas. If you have many other "exotic" fonts
in your systems, further tests are welcome.
Probably the best solution was to use a custom QLabel which overrides its
paintEvent() function, but I didn't know how to deal with it, since it's
too low level.

Screenshot for a quick feedback (HandelGothic font):
http://abload.de/img/kronometer2a2k3a.png

Cheers,
Elvis

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

2014-04-23 14:28 GMT+02:00 Thomas Lübking :

> On Mittwoch, 23. April 2014 13:17:02 CEST, Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
>
>  I don't understand. Since there are only numbers I think that your point
>> is
>> already accomplished.
>>
> Nope.
> To get monospace glyphs for sure, you must select a monospace font -
> otherwise you're going by luck.
>
>  At least on my system
>>
> ;-)
>
>
>  Have you found a particular font that doesn't look this way?
>>
> Hundreds - it's pretty common and the more "exotic" the fonts get
> (script), the more obvious this becomes, but you may try Fontin [1],
> Bitstream Handel Gothic [2], Adobe Jenson or Linotype Frutiger (latter are
> commercial fonts, no link - sorry. I can send you screenshots of the fonts
> though and some resellers will likely provide some as well) for some
> "reasonable" choices.
> In addition, the hinter and font size/weight can have impact.
>
>
Oh my god, using these fonts the stopwatch display is an eyesore.
Thanks for the explanation, this thing has to be fixed, sure as hell. I
will try with different labels for each digit.

Elvis


> Cheers,
> Thomas
>
> [1] http://www.exljbris.com/fontin.html
> [2] http://fontpark.net/de/schriftart/handel-gothic-bt/#
>Please don't ask me whether that's a legal offer.
>

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

Hi Thomas,

2014-04-19 11:24 GMT+02:00 Thomas Lübking :

> Am Freitag, 18. April 2014 schrieb Elvis Angelaccio :
>
> > Final screenshot with all these changes:
> http://abload.de/img/kronometerdrkjq.png
>
> I think by "right align", Ingo meant numerical, not pixelwise, ie the
> display should be
>
> 00 00 00 00
> even if the left digit would be invisible
>

This screenshot restores the previous, center, alignment of the labels and
adds the left digit for the hours: http://abload.de/img/kronometer1rjkbz.png


> It's actually that you probably best would fake a monospace font, so that
> the left digit stays in place while the right one iterates.
> You'd best drop QLabel and paint the widget yourself, but it's possible.
> Even using just more labels and custom layout management.
>
>
I don't understand. Since there are only numbers I think that your point is
already accomplished. At least on my system, which uses DejaVu Sans as
default font, the left digits stay in place while the right ones iterate.
Have you found a particular font that doesn't look this way?


> Cheers,
> Thomas


Regards,
Elvis

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Thomas Lübking]

On Mittwoch, 23. April 2014 13:17:02 CEST, Elvis Angelaccio wrote:


I don't understand. Since there are only numbers I think that your point is
already accomplished.

Nope.
To get monospace glyphs for sure, you must select a monospace font - otherwise 
you're going by luck.


At least on my system

;-)


Have you found a particular font that doesn't look this way?

Hundreds - it's pretty common and the more "exotic" the fonts get (script), the more 
obvious this becomes, but you may try Fontin [1], Bitstream Handel Gothic [2], Adobe Jenson or 
Linotype Frutiger (latter are commercial fonts, no link - sorry. I can send you screenshots of the 
fonts though and some resellers will likely provide some as well) for some "reasonable" 
choices.
In addition, the hinter and font size/weight can have impact.

Cheers,
Thomas

[1] http://www.exljbris.com/fontin.html
[2] http://fontpark.net/de/schriftart/handel-gothic-bt/#
   Please don't ask me whether that's a legal offer.

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[GEO]

> Final screenshot with all these changes:
> http://abload.de/img/kronometerdrkjq.png

I would agree with Thomas, the right align is not the best idea imho. 

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Thomas Lübking]

Am Freitag, 18. April 2014 schrieb Elvis Angelaccio :
> Final screenshot with all these changes:
http://abload.de/img/kronometerdrkjq.png

I think by "right align", Ingo meant numerical, not pixelwise, ie the
display should be

00 00 00 00
even if the left digit would be invisible

It's actually that you probably best would fake a monospace font, so that
the left digit stays in place while the right one iterates.
You'd best drop QLabel and paint the widget yourself, but it's possible.
Even using just more labels and custom layout management.

Cheers,
Thomas

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

2014-04-17 20:04 GMT+02:00 Ingo Klöcker :

> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 12:56:01 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> > So, the choice is between the branch  and . Let me know
> > what do you prefer.
> >
> > For completeness the alternatives in details are:
> >
> > - branch : no splitters, with dividers (i.e. 4 QFrames in a
> > horizontal layout):
> > http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-splittevdklc.png
>
> This would look much better if you remove the ':' and '.' after the
> numbers. IMO the ':'/'.' are superfluous because the numbers are already
> clearly separated by the frame border.
>
> Also you should probably right-align the numbers. In particular, the
> hours. For the other numbers alignment probably doesn't matter.
> Moreover, I think it would look best if all four frames were the same
> size.
>
> Hi, thanks for your suggestions!
I've committed all these changes on the  branch.
I've applied the right alignment to all the labels because looks more
consistent. (e.g when the window is full size).


>
> > - branch :
> > no splitters, no dividers (i.e. single QFrame with a grid layout):
> > http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-divideri4kce.png
>
> Here the ':'/'.' need to stay for obvious reasons. But you should try to
> make the spacing between the numbers and the ':'/'.' identical. Possible
> solution: Put the ':'/'.' into columns of their own. And right-align the
> hours.
>
>
This one is not trivial. I could use columns on their own for the
"dividers", but these symbols are displayed only if there are numbers on
their right.
At the moment I handle this check in the QTimeFormat class, it would be
difficult to move this logic to a widget class like QTimeDisplay is.

Since also Albert agrees with the first alternative, probably the second
one it's not worth of the effort.


>
> I'd also get rid of the upper toolbar. You do already have the essential
> tools in the lower toolbar and having two toolbars even with differently
> sized icons makes the UI look unnecessarily crowded.
>
>
Final screenshot with all these changes:
http://abload.de/img/kronometerdrkjq.png



>
> Just my two cents.
>
>
> Regards,
> Ingo
>

Regards,
Elvis

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Dijous, 17 d'abril de 2014, a les 20:04:07, Ingo Klöcker va escriure:
> On Wednesday 16 April 2014 12:56:01 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> > So, the choice is between the branch  and . Let me know
> > what do you prefer.
> > 
> > For completeness the alternatives in details are:
> > 
> > - branch : no splitters, with dividers (i.e. 4 QFrames in a
> > horizontal layout):
> > http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-splittevdklc.png
> 
> This would look much better if you remove the ':' and '.' after the
> numbers. IMO the ':'/'.' are superfluous because the numbers are already
> clearly separated by the frame border.
> 
> Also you should probably right-align the numbers. In particular, the
> hours. For the other numbers alignment probably doesn't matter.
> Moreover, I think it would look best if all four frames were the same
> size.

I think this is the one that may look the best, agree with Ingo that removing 
the : and . probably makes sense.

Cheers,
  Albert

> 
> > - branch :
> > no splitters, no dividers (i.e. single QFrame with a grid layout):
> > http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-divideri4kce.png
> 
> Here the ':'/'.' need to stay for obvious reasons. But you should try to
> make the spacing between the numbers and the ':'/'.' identical. Possible
> solution: Put the ':'/'.' into columns of their own. And right-align the
> hours.
> 
> 
> I'd also get rid of the upper toolbar. You do already have the essential
> tools in the lower toolbar and having two toolbars even with differently
> sized icons makes the UI look unnecessarily crowded.
> 
> 
> Just my two cents.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Ingo


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Wednesday 16 April 2014 12:56:01 Elvis Angelaccio wrote:
> So, the choice is between the branch  and . Let me know
> what do you prefer.
> 
> For completeness the alternatives in details are:
> 
> - branch : no splitters, with dividers (i.e. 4 QFrames in a
> horizontal layout):
> http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-splittevdklc.png

This would look much better if you remove the ':' and '.' after the 
numbers. IMO the ':'/'.' are superfluous because the numbers are already 
clearly separated by the frame border.

Also you should probably right-align the numbers. In particular, the 
hours. For the other numbers alignment probably doesn't matter. 
Moreover, I think it would look best if all four frames were the same 
size.


> - branch :
> no splitters, no dividers (i.e. single QFrame with a grid layout):
> http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-divideri4kce.png

Here the ':'/'.' need to stay for obvious reasons. But you should try to 
make the spacing between the numbers and the ':'/'.' identical. Possible 
solution: Put the ':'/'.' into columns of their own. And right-align the 
hours.


I'd also get rid of the upper toolbar. You do already have the essential 
tools in the lower toolbar and having two toolbars even with differently 
sized icons makes the UI look unnecessarily crowded.


Just my two cents.


Regards,
Ingo


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

2014-04-16 11:41 GMT+02:00 Elvis Angelaccio :

> 2014-04-15 22:27 GMT+02:00 Albert Astals Cid :
>
> El Dilluns, 14 d'abril de 2014, a les 11:35:02, Elvis Angelaccio va
>> escriure:
>> > 2014-04-14 1:06 GMT+02:00 Albert Astals Cid :
>> > >  * Your choice of splitters to separate hours/minutes/seconds seems a
>> bit
>> > >
>> > > weird do you think that anyone will use it to have something like very
>> > > wide
>> > > minutes and narrow the rest?
>> >
>> > I see your point, probably the splitters are unnecessary UI components
>> for
>> > this use case.
>> > What do you think about an option in "Interface settings"? I could
>> display
>> > by default a single QFrame (without splitters) and leave to the user an
>> > opt-in to allow the splitters.
>> > In this way I can reuse the existing code without too much refactoring.
>>
>> I just don't see the need for the splitters, why would someone want to
>> have
>> them?
>>
>>
> To be honest there are no real motivations, I just thought that a splitter
> could be a further feature.
> But indeed it's useless, at least if not used for a particular use case
> (see Thomas suggestions).
>
> I've just pushed a  branch without splitters, for a quick feedback
> look here: http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-splittevdklc.png
>
> If you want instead a "single display" without the dividers between
> hours/minutes/etc, then I can push another experimental branch .
> Something like this older version:
> http://abload.de/img/kronometer-running-la6ddg3.png
> But since now kronometer has those "header" labels above the numbers, I
> would need a tabular layout and from my earlier tests I remember that it
> looks ugly.
>

Sorry, forget my last statement. I've just tried using a QGridLayout and
there is nothing wrong with it:
http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-divideri4kce.png
This alternative is in the branch . I just need to fix the
QTimeDisplay::setTimeFormat() function.

So, the choice is between the branch  and . Let me know what
do you prefer.

For completeness the alternatives in details are:

- branch : no splitters, with dividers (i.e. 4 QFrames in a
horizontal layout): http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-splittevdklc.png
- branch : no splitters, no dividers (i.e. single QFrame with a grid
layout): http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-divideri4kce.png

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

2014-04-15 22:27 GMT+02:00 Albert Astals Cid :

> El Dilluns, 14 d'abril de 2014, a les 11:35:02, Elvis Angelaccio va
> escriure:
> > 2014-04-14 1:06 GMT+02:00 Albert Astals Cid :
> > >  * Your choice of splitters to separate hours/minutes/seconds seems a
> bit
> > >
> > > weird do you think that anyone will use it to have something like very
> > > wide
> > > minutes and narrow the rest?
> >
> > I see your point, probably the splitters are unnecessary UI components
> for
> > this use case.
> > What do you think about an option in "Interface settings"? I could
> display
> > by default a single QFrame (without splitters) and leave to the user an
> > opt-in to allow the splitters.
> > In this way I can reuse the existing code without too much refactoring.
>
> I just don't see the need for the splitters, why would someone want to have
> them?
>
>
To be honest there are no real motivations, I just thought that a splitter
could be a further feature.
But indeed it's useless, at least if not used for a particular use case
(see Thomas suggestions).

I've just pushed a  branch without splitters, for a quick feedback
look here: http://abload.de/img/kronometer-no-splittevdklc.png

If you want instead a "single display" without the dividers between
hours/minutes/etc, then I can push another experimental branch .
Something like this older version:
http://abload.de/img/kronometer-running-la6ddg3.png
But since now kronometer has those "header" labels above the numbers, I
would need a tabular layout and from my earlier tests I remember that it
looks ugly.


> Cheers,
>   Albert
>

Regards,
Elvis

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Thomas Lübking]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Albert Astals Cid  wrote:

I just don't see the need for the splitters, why would someone 
want to have

them?


I see a limited usage (and only) in case they're collapsible (and grow by char 
width) what would allow to set a target scale (if you measure hours, you likely 
don't care about seconds et vv.) - but I think that it's mostly just 
skeumorphism (imitating individually wrapping hardware labels).

Scale adjustment could be done "better" (automatic, resp. radiobutton or slider 
driven or a semi-automatic hybrid or different font sizes, or ...) on a virtual tool.

Cheers,
Thomas

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Aleix Pol]

On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Albert Astals Cid  wrote:

> El Dilluns, 14 d'abril de 2014, a les 11:35:02, Elvis Angelaccio va
> escriure:
> > 2014-04-14 1:06 GMT+02:00 Albert Astals Cid :
> > >  * Your choice of splitters to separate hours/minutes/seconds seems a
> bit
> > >
> > > weird do you think that anyone will use it to have something like very
> > > wide
> > > minutes and narrow the rest?
> >
> > I see your point, probably the splitters are unnecessary UI components
> for
> > this use case.
> > What do you think about an option in "Interface settings"? I could
> display
> > by default a single QFrame (without splitters) and leave to the user an
> > opt-in to allow the splitters.
> > In this way I can reuse the existing code without too much refactoring.
>
> I just don't see the need for the splitters, why would someone want to have
> them?
>
> Cheers,
>   Albert
>

FWIW, the first time I saw a screenshot of this application, these
splitters shocked me too a bit.
I guess the design will iterate anyway, no?

Aleix

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Dilluns, 14 d'abril de 2014, a les 11:35:02, Elvis Angelaccio va escriure:
> 2014-04-14 1:06 GMT+02:00 Albert Astals Cid :
> >  * Your choice of splitters to separate hours/minutes/seconds seems a bit
> > 
> > weird do you think that anyone will use it to have something like very
> > wide
> > minutes and narrow the rest?
> 
> I see your point, probably the splitters are unnecessary UI components for
> this use case.
> What do you think about an option in "Interface settings"? I could display
> by default a single QFrame (without splitters) and leave to the user an
> opt-in to allow the splitters.
> In this way I can reuse the existing code without too much refactoring.

I just don't see the need for the splitters, why would someone want to have 
them?

Cheers,
  Albert

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Elvis Angelaccio]

2014-04-14 1:06 GMT+02:00 Albert Astals Cid :

> El Dilluns, 7 d'abril de 2014, a les 23:52:19, Elvis Angelaccio va
> escriure:
> > Hi all,
>
> Hi!
>
>
Hi Albert,


> > with this email I'm going to ask a review for Kronometer, in order to be
> > accepted in KDE.
> > Kronometer is a stopwatch application for KDE. It's meant to be simple
> but
> > also customizable.
> >
> > Kronometer has been moved to kdereview from its previous location,
> > playground/utils. I'm not sure whether to ask the admission in
> > extragear-utils or in kdeutils.
>
> Personally I don't see it being a broad enough use case to make sense to
> be in
> kdeutils. What do others think? Have you asked at kde-utils-devel
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-utils-devel ?
>

No, I have not yet asked. I will do it.


>
> > What I'm looking for is the help of the KDE community with translations,
> > packaging and bug-tracking. If the choice is definitely up to me, it
> would
> > be nice to join the kdeutils module.
> >
> > Regarding the requirements for the admission:
> >
> > 1. There is the documentation in DocBook format. Thanks to Yuri
> Chornoivan
> > for his help.
> > 2. Source code is documented using the doxygen syntax, as suggested in
> the
> > techbase documentation policy.
> > 3. All the krazy code checker issues have been addressed.
> > 4. No usability review has been done, but it's welcome.
> > 5. Profiler: unfortunately I don't know how to do it. I used Valgrind and
> > there shouldn't be memory leaks.
> > I tried to use also Callgrind but I'm not able to understand its output.
> If
> > a profiler check is strictly required, I'll need help for it.
>
> Nah, it's not like your app is doing anything very resource intensive so
> you
> don't need performance testing (just make sure you don't hog the cpu at
> 100%
> :D)
>
> Some small comment from my side:
>  * You are passing an email address as bug address, you should leave the
> default bugzilla one there and create a kronometer bug entry in
> bugs.kde.org
> if you don't have power for that ask to the sysadmin guys about it.
>

Yes, I put only a temporary email address, waiting for an official bugs
entry.


>  * Your choice of splitters to separate hours/minutes/seconds seems a bit
> weird do you think that anyone will use it to have something like very wide
> minutes and narrow the rest?
>

I see your point, probably the splitters are unnecessary UI components for
this use case.
What do you think about an option in "Interface settings"? I could display
by default a single QFrame (without splitters) and leave to the user an
opt-in to allow the splitters.
In this way I can reuse the existing code without too much refactoring.


>  * The general/font/save settings probably would look nicer with a vertical
> spacer at the end that eats up empty space when the vertical space is
> bigger
> than needed (i.e. similar to what you have in interface settings).
>

Good catch, there the spacers have been forgotten.


>
> Cheers,
>   Albert
>
>
>
Regards,
Elvis


> > 6. The application should be completely translatable, thanks again to the
> > help of Yuri.
> >
> > Finally here the references:
> >
> > Kronometer repository in kdereview:
> > *https://projects.kde.org/projects/kdereview/kronometer
> > *
> > Kronometer quickgit: http://quickgit.kde.org/?p=kronometer.git
> > Kronometer website:
> > http://aelog.org/kronometer/
> >
> > If you want to quickly browse the code, you can also do it whit the
> Woboq's
> > code browser here: http://aelog.org/codebrowser/kronometer/
> >
> > Thank you for your time,
> > Elvis Angelaccio
>
>

Re: Kronometer now in KDE Review

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Dilluns, 7 d'abril de 2014, a les 23:52:19, Elvis Angelaccio va escriure:
> Hi all,

Hi!

> with this email I'm going to ask a review for Kronometer, in order to be
> accepted in KDE.
> Kronometer is a stopwatch application for KDE. It's meant to be simple but
> also customizable.
> 
> Kronometer has been moved to kdereview from its previous location,
> playground/utils. I'm not sure whether to ask the admission in
> extragear-utils or in kdeutils.

Personally I don't see it being a broad enough use case to make sense to be in 
kdeutils. What do others think? Have you asked at kde-utils-devel 
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-utils-devel ?

> What I'm looking for is the help of the KDE community with translations,
> packaging and bug-tracking. If the choice is definitely up to me, it would
> be nice to join the kdeutils module.
> 
> Regarding the requirements for the admission:
> 
> 1. There is the documentation in DocBook format. Thanks to Yuri Chornoivan
> for his help.
> 2. Source code is documented using the doxygen syntax, as suggested in the
> techbase documentation policy.
> 3. All the krazy code checker issues have been addressed.
> 4. No usability review has been done, but it's welcome.
> 5. Profiler: unfortunately I don't know how to do it. I used Valgrind and
> there shouldn't be memory leaks.
> I tried to use also Callgrind but I'm not able to understand its output. If
> a profiler check is strictly required, I'll need help for it.

Nah, it's not like your app is doing anything very resource intensive so you 
don't need performance testing (just make sure you don't hog the cpu at 100% 
:D)

Some small comment from my side:
 * You are passing an email address as bug address, you should leave the 
default bugzilla one there and create a kronometer bug entry in bugs.kde.org 
if you don't have power for that ask to the sysadmin guys about it.
 * Your choice of splitters to separate hours/minutes/seconds seems a bit 
weird do you think that anyone will use it to have something like very wide 
minutes and narrow the rest?
 * The general/font/save settings probably would look nicer with a vertical 
spacer at the end that eats up empty space when the vertical space is bigger 
than needed (i.e. similar to what you have in interface settings).

Cheers,
  Albert


> 6. The application should be completely translatable, thanks again to the
> help of Yuri.
> 
> Finally here the references:
> 
> Kronometer repository in kdereview:
> *https://projects.kde.org/projects/kdereview/kronometer
> *
> Kronometer quickgit: http://quickgit.kde.org/?p=kronometer.git
> Kronometer website:
> http://aelog.org/kronometer/
> 
> If you want to quickly browse the code, you can also do it whit the Woboq's
> code browser here: http://aelog.org/codebrowser/kronometer/
> 
> Thank you for your time,
> Elvis Angelaccio