---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/#review78707
---
This is now obsoleted?
- David Edmundson
On Feb. 25, 2015,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/#review76873
---
+1
- David Edmundson
On Feb. 25, 2015, 5:40 p.m., Marco
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/#review76597
---
src/CMakeLists.txt
On Feb. 25, 2015, 12:07 p.m., Marco Martin wrote:
Also, would it maybe make sense to have a different library in
KConfigWidgets for this? It seems quite disjoint from the rest...
it's a base kcmodule, so i don't think so
- Marco
On Feb. 24, 2015, 10:59 a.m., David Edmundson wrote:
src/kcmoduleqml.h, line 36
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/diff/3/?file=351295#file351295line36
When we do make a QML only system settings we're not going to want to
use KCMModule at all, even if it's not shown?
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/
---
(Updated Feb. 25, 2015, 5:40 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Frameworks.
On Feb. 24, 2015, 10:59 a.m., David Edmundson wrote:
src/kcmoduleqml.h, line 36
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/diff/3/?file=351295#file351295line36
When we do make a QML only system settings we're not going to want to
use KCMModule at all, even if it's not shown?
On Feb. 24, 2015, 10:59 a.m., David Edmundson wrote:
src/kcmoduleqml.h, line 36
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/diff/3/?file=351295#file351295line36
When we do make a QML only system settings we're not going to want to
use KCMModule at all, even if it's not shown?
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/#review76528
---
CMakeLists.txt
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/122706/#review76526
---
CMakeLists.txt
10 matches
Mail list logo
