On Mar 1, 3:56 am, "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Google has the SOC up. Should we submit for some tasks under KDE?
Sounds like a great idea
Someone has already put up ideas for KWord [1] and a new project
called Kobby[2].
Both are a step in the right direction but could do with a touch up.
Also something for Kate would be fantastic.
Hmm looking at the details the KWord description is a little short on
details and Kobby is trying to tackle Kate and Kdevelop in one go
while ignoring current developments like libinfinote which is done by
the gobby guys. :)
Well I think what we need to do is really pinpoint what someone can start working on. That should be more attractive than these which basically say "This is a good idea. Jump to it!"
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 1:10 AM, <psychobr...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 3:56 am, "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Google has the SOC up. Should we submit for some tasks under KDE?
> Sounds like a great idea > Someone has already put up ideas for KWord [1] and a new project > called Kobby[2].
> Both are a step in the right direction but could do with a touch up. > Also something for Kate would be fantastic.
> Hmm looking at the details the KWord description is a little short on > details and Kobby is trying to tackle Kate and Kdevelop in one go > while ignoring current developments like libinfinote which is done by > the gobby guys. :)
On Mar 6, 2:52 am, "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well I think what we need to do is really pinpoint what someone can
> start working on. That should be more attractive than these which
> basically say "This is a good idea. Jump to it!"
So what would be the best way forward?
Just thinking out loud, extending the existing katepart or even the
ktexteditor class would probably go a long way. Using a library like
libinfinote should make that a feasible target for a soc project.
Well here is where I get fuzzy on the structure. Is MateEdit a fork of kate that remerges every now and again or do we work directly on kate? and then pull funky breaking stuff into MateEdit to break in a fantastic manner then to return with a chorus and fireworks to the embracing arms of KDE?
On 3/6/08, psychobr...@gmx.net <psychobr...@gmx.net> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 2:52 am, "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well I think what we need to do is really pinpoint what someone can > > start working on. That should be more attractive than these which > > basically say "This is a good idea. Jump to it!"
> So what would be the best way forward?
> Just thinking out loud, extending the existing katepart or even the > ktexteditor class would probably go a long way. Using a library like > libinfinote should make that a feasible target for a soc project.
MateEdit currently has no shared code with Kate. It also is based on
KDE3 so not much use for current development.
What it should do is use the underlying KDE classes such as
ktexteditor for it's editing component, spice it up with collaborative
editing using libinfinote and then once it all works merge it all back
with the fireworks you mention :)
Having said that all this can of course be done straight inside the
KDE repository without the need for MateEdit in the mix so that would
be a good SOC project.
I will go and get in touch with the person who put the orignal kobby
entry up to see what his thoughts are.
On Mar 7, 3:53 am, "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well here is where I get fuzzy on the structure. Is MateEdit a fork of
> kate that remerges every now and again or do we work directly on kate?
> and then pull funky breaking stuff into MateEdit to break in a
> fantastic manner then to return with a chorus and fireworks to the
> embracing arms of KDE?
> On 3/6/08, psychobr...@gmx.net <psychobr...@gmx.net> wrote:
> > On Mar 6, 2:52 am, "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Well I think what we need to do is really pinpoint what someone can
> > > start working on. That should be more attractive than these which
> > > basically say "This is a good idea. Jump to it!"
> > So what would be the best way forward?
> > Just thinking out loud, extending the existing katepart or even the
> > ktexteditor class would probably go a long way. Using a library like
> > libinfinote should make that a feasible target for a soc project.
> MateEdit currently has no shared code with Kate. It also is based on
> KDE3 so not much use for current development.
> What it should do is use the underlying KDE classes such as
> ktexteditor for it's editing component, spice it up with collaborative
> editing using libinfinote and then once it all works merge it all back
> with the fireworks you mention :)
> Having said that all this can of course be done straight inside the
> KDE repository without the need for MateEdit in the mix so that would
> be a good SOC project.
> I will go and get in touch with the person who put the orignal kobby
> entry up to see what his thoughts are.
> On Mar 7, 3:53 am, "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well here is where I get fuzzy on the structure. Is MateEdit a fork of
> > kate that remerges every now and again or do we work directly on kate?
> > and then pull funky breaking stuff into MateEdit to break in a
> > fantastic manner then to return with a chorus and fireworks to the
> > embracing arms of KDE?
> > On 3/6/08, psychobr...@gmx.net <psychobr...@gmx.net> wrote:
> > > On Mar 6, 2:52 am, "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Well I think what we need to do is really pinpoint what someone can
> > > > start working on. That should be more attractive than these which
> > > > basically say "This is a good idea. Jump to it!"
> > > So what would be the best way forward?
> > > Just thinking out loud, extending the existing katepart or even the
> > > ktexteditor class would probably go a long way. Using a library like
> > > libinfinote should make that a feasible target for a soc project.
If he is going to do a document management interface it would make sense to have that in conjunction with the open session dialog but how would that work with respect to real KIO document sessions and collaborative sessions? Let me think on it in bed a bit. Night!
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Roger Pixley <skree...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Just checking ig Greg is on this list. Been a little bit since he > updated his blog
The main issue here is that Kate has a notion of sessions can contain a number of documents. Inside infinote each document is managed through a session so there might be a bit of confusion here. The problem is that it probably isn't all that optimal to open a new infinote session for every document inside a Kate session on startup.
I would think for opening, there could be some KIO interface to enumerate documents on the other side, but that needs a fair amount of investigation to see how a KIO->Kate Document Session handover could be done.
> Datum: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:16:33 -0500
> Von: "Roger Pixley" <skree...@gmail.com>
> An: kollaborative-frame@googlegroups.com
> Betreff: Re: Google SoC
> Ok So incase anyone is following this and not following Gregs Blog he has
> an
> issue in his latest post
> That he is musing about
> http://gregarei.com/2008/07/gsoc-phase-2-kobby-development/ Anyone have
> any
> comments?
> If he is going to do a document management interface it would make sense
> to
> have that in conjunction with the open session dialog but how would that
> work with respect to real KIO document sessions and collaborative
> sessions?
> Let me think on it in bed a bit. Night!
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Roger Pixley <skree...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Just checking ig Greg is on this list. Been a little bit since he
> > updated his blog
> > On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 1:57 AM, Roger Pixley <skree
