Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-24 Thread Albert Vaca Cintora
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/84/ --- (Updated June 24, 2013, 10:15 p.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks. S

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-24 Thread Kevin Ottens
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/84/#review35019 --- Please also mark the feature on KLineEdit deprecated in that pa

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-25 Thread Albert Vaca Cintora
> On June 25, 2013, 6:46 a.m., Kevin Ottens wrote: > > kio/kfile/kurlrequester.cpp, line 483 > > > > > > Why don't you use KUrlMimeData like the original code in KLineEdit? > > It'll be more robust AFAICT. I'm u

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-25 Thread Albert Vaca Cintora
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/84/ --- (Updated June 25, 2013, 10:46 a.m.) Review request for KDE Frameworks. D

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-25 Thread David Faure
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/84/#review35051 --- KDE5PORTING.html

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-26 Thread Kevin Ottens
> On June 25, 2013, 6:46 a.m., Kevin Ottens wrote: > > kio/kfile/kurlrequester.cpp, line 483 > > > > > > Why don't you use KUrlMimeData like the original code in KLineEdit? > > It'll be more robust AFAICT. > > A

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-26 Thread David Faure
> On June 25, 2013, 6:46 a.m., Kevin Ottens wrote: > > kio/kfile/kurlrequester.cpp, line 483 > > > > > > Why don't you use KUrlMimeData like the original code in KLineEdit? > > It'll be more robust AFAICT. > > A

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-26 Thread Kevin Ottens
> On June 25, 2013, 6:46 a.m., Kevin Ottens wrote: > > kio/kfile/kurlrequester.cpp, line 483 > > > > > > Why don't you use KUrlMimeData like the original code in KLineEdit? > > It'll be more robust AFAICT. > > A

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-06-30 Thread Albert Vaca Cintora
> On June 25, 2013, 6:46 a.m., Kevin Ottens wrote: > > kio/kfile/kurlrequester.cpp, line 483 > > > > > > Why don't you use KUrlMimeData like the original code in KLineEdit? > > It'll be more robust AFAICT. > > A

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-07-01 Thread Kevin Ottens
> On June 25, 2013, 6:46 a.m., Kevin Ottens wrote: > > kio/kfile/kurlrequester.cpp, line 483 > > > > > > Why don't you use KUrlMimeData like the original code in KLineEdit? > > It'll be more robust AFAICT. > > A

Re: Review Request 111184: Url drop functionality in KUrlRequester does not depend on KLineEdit (since we have to port it to QLineEdit)

2013-07-16 Thread Albert Vaca Cintora
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/84/ --- (Updated July 16, 2013, 10:03 p.m.) Status -- This change has been di