Re: Re: other_stuff.h | [was: Review Request for KDecoration]

On Tuesday 11 November 2014 17:00:24 Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Dienstag, 11. November 2014 14:43:56 CEST, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > >> "BorderSize" - do we *really* want to keep this or rather allow > >> pixel/pointwise configuration of 2,3, or 4 border sizes glob

Re: Re: other_stuff.h | [was: Review Request for KDecoration]

On Tuesday 11 November 2014 17:48:58 Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Dienstag, 11. November 2014 17:06:53 CEST, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > In case you have better naming suggestions please let me know. > > "::geometry(Qt::WindowFrameSection tile)" ? > > If you need pa

Re: Re: decoration.h | [was: Review Request for KDecoration]

On Tuesday 11 November 2014 23:23:09 Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Dienstag, 11. November 2014 13:30:09 CEST, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > Added a QRegion parameter (thought is to be able to render the complete > > > decoration in one go if needed): > Why a region? The core sends a

Re: Re: Re: other_stuff.h | [was: Review Request for KDecoration]

Martin GräßlinOn Tuesday 11 November 2014 17:53:53 wrote: > On Tuesday 11 November 2014 17:48:58 Thomas Lübking wrote: > > On Dienstag, 11. November 2014 17:06:53 CEST, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > > In case you have better naming suggestions please let me know. >

Re: Review Request 120931: [OS X] improvements to KWindowSystem

e auto-tests adjusted. - Martin Gräßlin On Nov. 15, 2014, 12:04 a.m., René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https:/

Re: Review Request 120931: [OS X] improvements to KWindowSystem

> On Nov. 15, 2014, 9:41 a.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > kdeui/tests/kwindowtest.cpp, lines 218-239 > > <https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/120931/diff/2/?file=328515#file328515line218> > > > > please note that your test application is fragile as it's bas

Re: Review Request 120931: [OS X] improvements to KWindowSystem

> On Nov. 15, 2014, 3:43 nachm., Thomas Lübking wrote: > > kdeui/windowmanagement/kwindowsystem_mac.cpp, line 556 > > > > > > Does this *really* cut it on OSX? > > The function is not supposed to be an extra

Re: Re: Review Request for KDecoration

On Sunday 16 November 2014 23:30:35 Christoph Feck wrote: > On Friday 31 October 2014 08:22:53 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > today I want to start the review process for the new KDecoration > > Hi Martin, > > thanks for the work, here are some random comments from my side. I >

Re: Re: Review Request for KDecoration

On Friday 28 November 2014 13:53:07 Sebastian Kügler wrote: > On Friday, November 28, 2014 12:00:43 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > > Given that you call it "fundamental", I suggest to allow qreal here. > > > A "millimeter" is really small, and if you only allow

Re: Re: Re: Review Request for KDecoration

Martin GräßlinOn Friday 28 November 2014 12:00:43 wrote: > > >void titleBarDoubleClicked(); > > > > Maybe it might sense to have the event here, to check keyboard > > modifiers? > > > > >void titleBarWheelEvent(const QPoint &angleDelta); > > > > Why not simply pass the QWheelEvent? I mi

Re: Re: Review Request for KDecoration

On Friday 28 November 2014 12:52:44 Christoph Feck wrote: > > > > Q_PROPERTY(QFont font > > > > > > When I want to compute pixel sizes for the requested font, how > > > do I get the correct QPaintDevice needed for the QFontMetrics? > > > Otherwise, please provide a QFontMetrics (see QStyleOption).

Re: Re: Review Request for KDecoration

On Friday 28 November 2014 15:25:03 Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Freitag, 28. November 2014 14:55:43 CEST, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > Both signals are now removed. Works like a charm with the > > handling directly in KWin. > > I foresee trouble/complicfication on this

Re: Re: decoration.h | [was: Review Request for KDecoration]

On Wednesday 12 November 2014 15:27:00 Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Mittwoch, 12. November 2014 08:19:54 CEST, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > My thought was that it's going to be > > * rect for top > > * rect for left > > * rect for right > > * rect for bottom &

Re: KFind

On Friday 05 December 2014 10:00:24 laurent Montel wrote: > Hi, > > I think that we can use Dolphin to search files. > I want to remove Kfind from kde-baseapps. > It was not ported and there is not maintainer. > > If nobody has an objection I will remove it at before christmas. I don't think tha

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

how to do it properly. In the end it should be: #if HAVE_X11 // x11 specific stuff #endif obviously it also needs a runtime check: if (QX11Info::isPlatformX11()) as we no longer should assume that X11 is the only platform on Unix(non OSX). - Martin Gräßlin On Dec. 8, 2014, 2:38 p.m., René J.V

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On Dec. 8, 2014, 3:07 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On Dec. 8, 2014, 3:07 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it

Re: Review Request 121390: make Qt5 theme build on Linux again

> On Dec. 8, 2014, 3:07 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > this is wrong - please have a look at various frameworks on how to do it > > properly. In the end it should be: > > #if HAVE_X11 > > // x11 specific stuff > > #endif > > > > obviously it

Re: Re: Review Request for KDecoration

On Wednesday 10 December 2014 00:21:38 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Divendres, 28 de novembre de 2014, a les 15:30:23, Martin Gräßlin va > > escriure: > > On Friday 28 November 2014 15:25:03 Thomas Lübking wrote: > > > On Freitag, 28. November 2014 14:55:43 CE

Re: Re: Review Request for KDecoration

On Wednesday 10 December 2014 00:31:03 Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Mittwoch, 10. Dezember 2014 00:21:38 CEST, Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > Where did the strings such as > > > > "Not on all desktops" > > They were/are not part of KDecoration, but KCommonDecoration - an optional > "simplifying" wrap

Re: Re: Review Request for KDecoration

On Thursday 11 December 2014 00:05:52 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Dimecres, 10 de desembre de 2014, a les 15:44:02, Thomas Lübking va > > escriure: > > On Mittwoch, 10. Dezember 2014 13:11:07 CEST, Christoph Feck wrote: > > > Every interactive on-screen element must have a text, either as a > >

Re: Re: Ksshaskpass ?

On Thursday 11 December 2014 08:33:48 Jeremy Whiting wrote: > ksshaskspass has been in kdereview and has been improved since it got > there. Is it ready to be moved to kde/workspace ? Sorry for being late for the review. I just cloned the repo and did a quick look for a common problem on X11: the

Re: Re: Re: Ksshaskpass ?

thanks, > Jeremy > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Thursday 11 December 2014 08:33:48 Jeremy Whiting wrote: > > > ksshaskspass has been in kdereview and has been improved since it got > > > there. Is it ready to be moved to kde/wo

Re: Re: Ksshaskpass ?

On Thursday 11 December 2014 23:25:55 Thomas Lübking wrote: > https://github.com/luebking/qarma/commit/b568dd14d6e1f661791c4d67245c614f1dc > 1986f > > The InputGuard class should handle everything. > In case you need it for QGraphicsWidget's, you may have to adjust the test > functions, but in gen

Re: Re: Ksshaskpass ?

On Friday 12 December 2014 16:11:25 Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Freitag, 12. Dezember 2014 08:00:45 CEST, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > I'd suggest to do a platform check as on Wayland it cannot work > > (grab keyboard fails). > > You're certainly right in that the guar

Re: Re: Ksshaskpass ?

On Sunday 14 December 2014 15:33:27 Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Sonntag, 14. Dezember 2014 13:52:51 CEST, Jeremy Whiting wrote: > > Martin, Thomas, > > > > Is the implementation of InputGuard at > > https://github.com/luebking/qarma/commit/b568dd14d6e1f661791c4d67245c614f1 > > dc1986f with > > http

Re: Re: Changes to our Git infrastructure

On Tuesday 06 January 2015 12:48:41 Jan Kundrát wrote: > On Tuesday, 6 January 2015 07:40:01 CEST, Ian Wadham wrote: > >a) "I do not know anything about Dr K, but I will try and > > > > find someone who does." > > > >b) "Unfortunately there is nobody available any more who > > > > knows

Re: Review Request: Make kdelibs and kdebase compile without glu library

d 2010-12-27 06:59:26) > > > Review request for kdelibs and Martin Gräßlin. > > > Summary > --- > > make kdelibs and kdebase compile without glu library > > > Diffs > - > > /trunk/KDE/kdebase/workspace/kwin/compositingprefs.cpp 1209318 >

Re: moving scratch repositories?

On Thursday 03 February 2011 19:28:44 Marco Martin wrote: > Hi all, > thi probably isn't going to be a good workflow for the future, but now that > kdelibs and base are just being converted i think would be a pretty common > problem. > > basically, what i have is some repositories (one born as gi

Re: Review Request: Workaround for the hang (freeze) when opening VLC's file dialog under KDE...

On Friday 04 February 2011 17:05:07 Tom Albers wrote: > - Original Message - > > > It > > is when I have to unnecessarily type more than I have to. Seriously > > this is getting to be annoying and I do not mean you personally. These > > rigid and brittle coding styles. One project says no

Re: svn-merge.py and git

On Sunday 06 February 2011 15:47:05 Arno Rehn wrote: > On Sunday 06 February 2011 14:13:57 Hugo Pereira Da Costa wrote: > > my idea at that > > time was that oxygen-transparent would get merged back to trunk/master at > > some point, but this will not happen > > Slighty off-topic, but why's that?

Re: Review Request: Add support for building libplasma with GLES2

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100705/#review1612 --- The GLApplet seems to be unmaintained and is nowhere used in KDE

Re: Review Request: Add support for building libplasma with GLES2

> On Feb. 23, 2011, 5:29 p.m., Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > The GLApplet seems to be unmaintained and is nowhere used in KDE (see > > http://lxr.kde.org/ident?i=GLApplet ). There was once one demo applet using > > it, but it has vanished. > > > > GLApplet us

Re: Review Request: Add a GUI to configure window's title bar blend colours

> On March 8, 2011, 2:12 p.m., Hans Meine wrote: > > kcontrol/colors/colorsettings.ui, line 615 > > > > > > I believe to recall that "blend" was the term used in the past as well, > > but given that not all styles

Re: Review Request: Add Rule/Property based composite blocking [kdelibs part]

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/100921/#review2349 --- Ship it! Btw a window implementation should be possible, though

Re: Re: Qt5 -> KDE5?

On Monday 09 May 2011 12:27:14 Maksim Orlovich wrote: > I am probably being a bit selfish here, but I don't see how we can > ever build on a toolkit that requires OpenGL ES2.0 level hardware. I think it would make sense to have at least optionally the legacy code (QWidget + X11) without an OpenGL

Re: Qt5 -> KDE5?

On Monday 09 May 2011 18:03:18 Olivier Goffart wrote: > Hi, > > With Qt5 around the corner[1], I think it is time to start thinking about KDE5 > > > Raw summary: > - Qt5 is planed to be released in about one year from now if everything goes > well. > - It should be mostly source compatible wi

Re: Requested Moratorium on hard to build dependency bumps for KDE 5

On Monday 06 June 2011 23:05:52 Ben Cooksley wrote: > Hi all, > > I am requesting that a moratorium on dependency bumps for dependencies > which are "hard to build" be enacted. This would affect system wide > components which rely on root access and are heavily integrated into > the system. This w

Re: Re: Requested Moratorium on hard to build dependency bumps for KDE 5

On Tuesday 07 June 2011 06:19:52 Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 3:48 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Monday 06 June 2011 23:05:52 Ben Cooksley wrote: > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I am requesting that a moratorium on dependency bumps for dependenci

Re: Re: Requested Moratorium on hard to build dependency bumps for KDE 5

On Tuesday 07 June 2011 08:29:51 Ben Cooksley wrote: > Next KWin. It currently depends upon Mesa 7.10. I have a local revert > in a private local branch which reverts the dependency check code > within KWin to continue to allow me to use compositing. Even though I > have Mesa 7.8, I rarely experien

Re: Requested Moratorium on hard to build dependency bumps for KDE 5

- Ursprüngliche Mitteilung - > On 6/6/11, Thomas Lübking wrote: > > Am Mon, 6 Jun 2011 17:08:24 -0400 > > schrieb Maksim Orlovich : > > > > > Why would wayland support have any effect on runtime dependency on > > > X11? > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/wayland-display-server/web/b

Re: Requested Moratorium on hard to build dependency bumps for KDE 5

On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:51:32 +1200, Ben Cooksley wrote: It should not affect the runtime requirements for X11, but if Mesa 7.11 gets released before our 4.8 dependency freeze, we have to depend on it. Can you please clarify what you mean by we *have* to depend on it? Does this mean which of th

Re: KDM plans and lightDM

On Monday 13 June 2011 21:10:36 Alex Fiestas wrote: > Hi there > > Today something happened to me again, I turn on my laptop at the begining of > a > meeting and when I needed it the battery was over because the laptop didn't > went to suspension (as I'm used). > > That makes me wonder what a

Re: KDM plans and lightDM

On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:29:45 -0400, Shaun Reich wrote: lightDM is also headed by my dear friend Canonical, as is clearly seen. Serious question: does anyone know if it requires Canonical's copyright assignment to contribute to lightDM? If yes we can stop any further discussion right here IMHO.

Re: Re: KDM plans and lightDM

On Tuesday 14 June 2011 10:35:49 Harald Sitter wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Jun 2011 16:29:45 -0400, Shaun Reich > > wrote: > >> > >> lightDM is also headed by my dear friend Canonical, as is clearly seen. >

Re: Re: KDM plans and lightDM

On Tuesday 14 June 2011 20:26:45 Harald Sitter wrote: > Agreed. > > Yet despite having complete control we did not manage to come up with a truly > good workspace experience that starts at the DM (power management, good > looks, > I for one have yet to see a sane UI-wise integration of stuff

Re: Re: KDM plans and lightDM

On Wednesday 15 June 2011 12:22:10 Alex Fiestas wrote: > But right now: (Once again this is what I see from outside:) > -KDM developers have no plans This seems incorrect, given Shaun's work on Plasma - and after the discussion in this thread this should be known by now. > -KDM maintainer has no

Re: Re: KDM plans and lightDM

On Wednesday 15 June 2011 17:46:08 Alex Fiestas wrote: > On Wednesday, June 15, 2011 05:37:14 PM todd rme wrote: > > There are apparently people willing to implement KDE support in > > LightDM, so why don't they instead improve KDM? Why should they be > > putting their effort into an immature proj

Re: Fixes in Git (first in stable, then merge to master)

On Wednesday 20 July 2011 11:52:31 Alex Fiestas wrote: > Hi there > > Last few days I have been patching some pieces of our workspace here and > there, the first set of patches I did them directly into master which if > I remember correctly was against the policy. > So, the second round of fixes

Re: Re: Fixes in Git (first in stable, then merge to master)

On Saturday 23 July 2011 01:42:16 David Jarvie wrote: > On Saturday 23 July 2011 00:00:16 Nicolas Alvarez wrote: > > There is no active policy saying you're supposed to merge. Almost everybody > > in KDE is still doing cherry-picks. KDevelop is the only KDE project I know > > that consistently us

Re: Re: Re: Fixes in Git (first in stable, then merge to master)

On Saturday 23 July 2011 19:28:53 Ben Cooksley wrote: > >> During the stable branch freeze before a minor version release (such as > >> currently before > > the 4.7 release), it isn't possible to commit bug fixes to stable first and > > then merge to master. > > Only master can be committed to,

Re: Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME

out of it and try in future to discuss such points each other before possible harm is done. This of course applies to both KDE and GNOME developers :-) Cheers Martin Gräßlin KWin Maintainer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME

On Monday 25 July 2011 15:57:16 Ben Cooksley wrote: > > > >> Otherwise our users will be the ones who will suffer. > > > > I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... This NamingClashCrisis is more > > They will. As an example, KMyMoney users for instance depend on System > Settings to be able t

Re: My Plans, Your Plans: Berlin Desktop Summit

On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 15:40:11 +0200, "Aaron J. Seigo" wrote: i'm VERY interested in what you are hoping and planning for from your own attendance at BDS. please share those goals so that we can all arrive more mentally prepared for what is in store. My Goal for Desktop Summit is to get the "KDE

Re: X11 expert help needed

On Monday 18 July 2011 22:43:20 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > Hi, > > I'm currently comparing our FindX11.cmake with the one in current cmake. > Our copy is in kdelibs/cmake/modules/, CMake's is in its Module/ directory. > > There are some things our version checks for, which the one from cmake >

Re: Master or 4.7 under VirtualBox/KVM

On Sunday 31 July 2011 12:58:05 Michael Jansen wrote: > Hi @all > > I am currently trying to setup a compiled from sources master on opensuse in > a > vm. I first tried kvm and then virtualbox. > > In both cases i got the same problem. The vms work as expected with the > opensuse 11.4 provided

Re: Master or 4.7 under VirtualBox/KVM

On Sunday 31 July 2011 12:58:05 Michael Jansen wrote: > Did we manage to break kde under virtual machines? Or is the problem here? > > Has someone a recent kde running in a vm? For the record: I just found the commit which broke it: 6aa2b5caf625a142e92bf4e7c99452bfad968a8c which basically remove

Re: Master or 4.7 under VirtualBox/KVM

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011 13:45:41 +0200, İsmail Dönmez wrote: Hi; On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 7:39 PM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: On Sunday 31 July 2011 12:58:05 Michael Jansen wrote: > Did we manage to break kde under virtual machines? Or is the problem here? > > Has someone a recent kde run

Re: Re: kdeinit (was: Summary from Buildsystem BoF at Desktop Summit)

On Saturday 20 August 2011 12:20:55 Thiago Macieira wrote: > That I agree: klauncher is systemd for KDE only, so we should see about > getting the same benefits from systemd instead. > > There are two drawbacks with that, though: > > 1) systemd will not likely ever run on non-Linux systems, not

Re: where is the title bar

On Friday 02 September 2011 18:16:05 Guy Maurel wrote: > Hello! > > It might be trivial: > I got many kde-xx software from git, compile... > > All windows have NO title bar. > Where is the problem? > A compiler flag? > A configuration error? > > I don't know where to look for! > Thanks for any h

Re: Re: where is the title bar

On Friday 02 September 2011 19:23:52 Guy Maurel wrote: > Hello Martin! > > First: Thanks! > On Friday, September 02, 2011 06:45:58 PM Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Friday 02 September 2011 18:16:05 Guy Maurel wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > > > It might be t

Re: mentor needed for start-up optimization Season of KDE student

On Tuesday 27 September 2011 16:57:20 Lydia Pintscher wrote: > Heya folks :) > > I've got an eager SoK student who needs a mentor for a bit of > hand-holding in the coding part of his project. He's already done > extensive research but is stuck on the implementation part because his > initial ment

Re: The case for a kdelibs 4.8

- Ursprüngliche Mitteilung - > Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > > A Dijous, 29 de setembre de 2011, Kevin Kofler vàreu escriure: > > > 1. This puts kdelibs 4 into maintenance mode even before KDE > > > Frameworks 5 is anywhere near a release, let alone versions of the > > > workspace and appl

Fwd: Re: "gamer" mouse button shortcuts (LONG)

forgot to add kcd -- Forwarded Message -- Subject: Re: "gamer" mouse button shortcuts (LONG) Date: Saturday 01 October 2011, 08:19:47 From: Martin Gräßlin To: Kwin, NET API, kwin styles API, kwin modules API On Friday 30 September 2011 15:14:10 Rick Stockton wro

Re: Re: The case for a kdelibs 4.8

On Saturday 01 October 2011 00:12:05 Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > Am Freitag, 30. September 2011, 10:07:27 schrieb Aaron J. Seigo: > > will say "Platform 4.7, Plasma > > Workspaces 4.8 and application updates" (or something along those lines). > > that was not just a marketing ploy, but an atte

Re: The future of Power Management - together with Activities

On Saturday 01 October 2011 16:27:48 Dario Freddi wrote: > Hello all, and sorry for cross-posting. > > Hopefully, this solution will please everyone and will make activities even > more useful. Do you like it? More suggestions? Speak now or shut up forever! Hi all, I urge everyone to calm down ab

Re: Re: The future of Power Management - together with Activities

On Sunday 02 October 2011 21:09:00 Andras Mantia wrote: > On Sunday, October 02, 2011 14:45:58 Dario Freddi wrote: > > > That was one example. Another example brought up is e.g switching of > > > strigi or nepomuk indexing when switching to a power saving profile. > > > These two are something that

Re: kdelibs 4.8? What to do about GENERIC_LIB_VERSION?

On Sunday 02 October 2011 18:36:14 Allen Winter wrote: > Howdy, > > A lot of CMakeLists.txt use the ${GENERIC_LIB_VERSION} to set the so > versioning of their libraries. > That variable is hard-coded in kdelibs/cmake/modules/KDE4Defaults.cmake > > If we rely on kdelibs-4.7 for the KDE SC 4.8 rel

Re: Review Request: W7 Tab thumbnails in dolphin.

> On Oct. 3, 2011, 1:15 p.m., David Faure wrote: > > Couldn't this be done higher in the stack, e.g. in KTabWidget or in Qt? > > Kevin Kofler wrote: > Indeed, I think there should be some interface for this stuff in kdelibs, > so that 1. applications don't have to add such platform-specific

Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

Hi all, as you might know we have been working on moving the screenlocker from KRunner to KWin and passed the control to the compositor (iff compositing is active) to ensure that nothing which should not be shown gets visible. I want to request a security audit for the changes to ensure that th

Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

On Monday 10 October 2011 20:02:07 Parker Coates wrote: > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 14:02, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > I want to request a security audit for the changes to ensure that the new > > implementation is as secure as the existing one and that I did not forget > > an

Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

On Tuesday 11 October 2011 15:33:39 Torgny Nyblom wrote: > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 14.55.29 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Monday 10 October 2011 20:02:07 Parker Coates wrote: > > > On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 14:02, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > > > I want to request a sec

Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:06:11 Andras Mantia wrote: > From here: > "If KWin crashes without restarting privacy is leaked but the system is > hardly useable due to missing window manager. This situation can savely > be ignored as a corner case as KWin normaly restart." > > This is not true, th

Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:33:39 you wrote: > Once the screen locker crashes, security must be assumed > broken (if only by visual access). > Therefore the locker must not crash full ack, we have to be at 0 crashes in KWin (which has to be our goal for Wayland anyway ;-) > and if it does, re-es

Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

On Tuesday 11 October 2011 17:47:13 you wrote: > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:00:46 +0200 > > schrieb Martin Gräßlin : > > that is a good suggestion. I will think about how I can add that. > > Though if someone breaks by crashing kwin he is also able to remove > > any log. So

Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

affected by the changes. Dim Display and turning off the screen are decoupled from the screen locking. > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 04:00:17PM +0200, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > yes if you have a terminal open and if it is the top most of stacking > > order it is possible to start an

Re: Screensaver to be or not to be (was: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch)

On Tuesday 11 October 2011 18:02:32 Torgny Nyblom wrote: > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 15.55.15 you wrote: > > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39 +0200 > > > > schrieb Torgny Nyblom : > > > Does this mean that I will be focred to use a screensaver with > > > password unlock? If so why is that not a vaild

Re: Re: Screensaver to be or not to be (was: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch)

On Tuesday 11 October 2011 20:12:39 Torgny Nyblom wrote: > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 19.52.36 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 18:02:32 Torgny Nyblom wrote: > > > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 15.55.15 you wrote: > > > > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 15:33:39

Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

On Tuesday 11 October 2011 21:06:13 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Tuesday 11 October 2011, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 16:06:11 Andras Mantia wrote: > > > From here: > > > "If KWin crashes without restarting privacy is leaked but the syste

Re: Re: Screensaver to be or not to be (was: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch)

On Wednesday 12 October 2011 08:26:20 Torgny Nyblom wrote: > On Tuesday 11 October 2011 20.54.42 Thomas Lübking wrote: > > Am Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:02:32 +0200 > > > > schrieb Torgny Nyblom : > > > Screensaver is bling only > > > > No, "screensaver hacks are bling only", a "screensaver" is a > > soft

Re: Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

On Wednesday 12 October 2011 09:10:40 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > > Of course KWin is a more complex application than others, but given > > what we need in a screen locker the difference becomes marginal IMHO. > > yes. one should consider decoupling the greeter from the core engine. > > > > > I m

Re: Re: Re: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch

On Wednesday 12 October 2011 19:38:11 Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 04:47:54PM +0200, Dario Freddi wrote: > > 2011/10/12 Martin Gräßlin : > > > ok I have been thinking about it and have a new proposal: > > > * writing a kded module to only hand

Re: Re: Screensaver to be or not to be (was: Re: Security Audit Request for Screenlocker Branch)

On Thursday 13 October 2011 17:29:16 Martin Koller wrote: > On Tuesday, 11. October 2011 21:11:03 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > > I consider most effects being "bling" yes, with that said I like it and > > > appreciate it but still most effects add no real productive va

Re: Re: Screensaver to be or not to be

On Thursday 13 October 2011 20:49:29 Matthias Fuchs wrote: > I understand and agree to the technical reasons against keeping the > current architecture but that does not mean that I agree to all the > other arguments. I just want to point out once more that we will not remove anything which is pos

Re: Review Request: Make the tab group Xproperty accessable via NETWinInfo

change and should be fine for 4.7 as well. But I don't know what's the state for additions to kdelibs currently... - Martin Gräßlin On Nov. 9, 2011, 10:15 p.m., Anton Kreuzkamp wrote: > > --- > This is an automatically g

Re: Re: [proposal] Move all of the ksecretsservice components into kdeutils/ksecrets

On Saturday 12 November 2011 08:12:27 Kevin Kofler wrote: > We definitely do want your ksecretsservice work ASAP and I don't see why it > can't be in kdelibs where it belongs. *sigh* could we please stop adding this whining about the frozen kdelibs in each thread on kde-core-devel. Yes we got tha

Re: Re: Suggestions for some KDE default options

On Saturday 17 December 2011 02:15:41 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jos=E9_Manuel_Santamar=EDa?= Lema wrote: > In first place, sorry for posting in this kind of thread, I'm doing it only > in hope that you find this message useful when dealing with trolls. I don't > want to offend anybody. thanks for your messag

Re: Re: hard-dep for Qt 4.8

On Wednesday 11 January 2012 17:38:11 Allen Winter wrote: > On Wednesday 11 January 2012 11:47:00 AM Shaun Reich wrote: > > Prompting motion for making Qt 4.8 a hard dependency for KDE > > 4.9/master. Currently kde-baseapps/plasma/folderview does not build > > against 4.7 due to an (albeit minor) a

Re: Re: hard-dep for Qt 4.8

On Friday 13 January 2012 10:06:10 Thiago Macieira wrote: > On Thursday, 12 de January de 2012 22.50.24, Ingo =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Kl=F6cker?= > wrote: > > If you want developers to switch to Qt 4.8 to get the KDE code better > > tested with this version of Qt then simply ask developers to do so. I > > s

Re: Re: hard-dep for Qt 4.8

On Tuesday 17 January 2012 17:06:26 Allen Winter wrote: > On Tuesday 17 January 2012 11:34:19 AM Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Friday 13 January 2012 10:06:10 Thiago Macieira wrote: > > > On Thursday, 12 de January de 2012 22.50.24, Ingo > > > =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Kl�cker?=>

Re: Re: hard-dep for Qt 4.8

On Wednesday 18 January 2012 10:26:13 Thomas Zander wrote: > On Wednesday 18 January 2012 10.11.58 todd rme wrote: > > But according to Martin, this isn't just about API changes, it is also > > about behavior changes. How do you expect people to know if they are > > relying on a Qt 4.8-specific be

Re: Re: hard-dep for Qt 4.8

On Wednesday 18 January 2012 12:53:25 Dario Freddi wrote: > Let's try to move the issue another way > round: can we think of a way in which we can safely make master depend > on new stuff without the risk of hurting these categories? Yes of course. First of all we have to think whether we introduce

Re: Re: hard-dep for Qt 4.8

On Thursday 19 January 2012 08:52:48 Thomas Zander wrote: > On Thursday 19 January 2012 08.15.39 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > > As far as I know there are no forward incompatible behavior changes > > > between Qt4.7 and Qt 4.8> I.e. AFAIK programming for 4.8 using 4.7 APIs >

Re: Review Request: #include

> On Jan. 22, 2012, 9:06 a.m., Erik Sigra wrote: > > Ship It! giving yourself a ship it kind of destroys the idea behind review board. >From my side there is a clear "NO" for everything KWin related. So why? Let's >consider for example atoms.h. I just used git blame and well the includes were

Re: Re: From kdelibs4 to KDE frameworks... how to make KDE more cross platform...

On Tuesday 14 February 2012 19:12:58 Alexander Neundorf wrote: > On Tuesday 14 February 2012, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > > On Monday, February 13, 2012 17:51:23 Shaun Reich wrote: > > > hate to chime in as well, but i think replacing the Windows shell > > > should definitely be something that's looked

Re: bugzilla situation

Am 22.02.2012 18:13, schrieb Laszlo Papp: The suggestion remains: to allow everyone to edit and close bugs, as is apparently the case in some other bug trackers. +1. Worked fine on the MeeGo bugzilla for instance, I previously used. Personally I'm not sure whether the MeeGo bugzilla can be co

Re: Color Managing KDE

Am 22.02.2012 20:01, schrieb Kai-Uwe Behrmann: Am 22.02.12, 09:38 -0800 schrieb Daniel Nicoletti: As Richard said Oyranos is doing all this by it self on the CPU so it would act like a proxy between your application, and the window manager which sounds like killing performance. ( I might have m

Re: Re: bugzilla situation

On Friday 24 February 2012 02:15:54 Sven Burmeister wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2012, 19:00:26 schrieb Martin Gräßlin: > > Personally I'm not sure whether the MeeGo bugzilla can be compared to > > the KDE one (technical oriented vs. user oriented). From my personal

Re: Re: Re: bugzilla situation

On Friday 24 February 2012 21:03:42 Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Friday 24 February 2012 02:15:54 Sven Burmeister wrote: > >> Am Mittwoch, 22. Februar 2012, 19:00:26 schrieb Martin Gräßlin: > >> > Personally

Re: Re: bugzilla situation

On Friday 24 February 2012 19:32:10 Andras Mantia wrote: > On Friday, February 24, 2012 06:10:23 PM Thomas Lübking wrote: > > Am 24.02.2012, 09:44 Uhr, schrieb Andras Mantia : > > > Bugzilla is not a to-do list, it is for what else... a bug (and > > > wishlist) > > > reporting tool for users. > > >

<    1   2   3   4   5   >