Frédéric Brière (654f5278) at 02 Feb 22:48
GIT_SILENT Sync po/docbooks with svn
... and 47 more commits
Frédéric Brière (dbe342fb) at 14 Sep 01:37
Display media for Tweets in search results
... and 12 more commits
Frédéric Brière (5d45db0d) at 14 Sep 01:36
Get the plugin manager lock to actually work as intended
... and 12 more commits
Frédéric Brière (776edcb5) at 05 Jul 20:58
I was a bit too lazy to add a formal Choqok::Application::instance() just for this. Maybe I should have?
Given how neither QApplication
nor QGuiApplication
override QCoreApplication::instance()
, I guess we shouldn't either. (They do redefine qApp
, though, but that seems a bit blunt for our purposes. I've looked around to see if other projects were doing something of the sort, and only found a few examples.)
A few additional remarks:
KIO::Job
objects fetching stuff over the network.qobject_cast<>
is kosher. I mean, sure, some sort of casting will have to occur (AFAIK), but I was a bit too lazy to add a formal Choqok::Application::instance()
just for this. Maybe I should have?quitOnLastWindowClosed
was disabled twice before, and now we're setting it twice to what is already the default value. This feels overkill, but I didn't dare mess with what was already there.The plugin manager lock does not currently do anything, and causes a use-after-destroy bug to boot. These two commits fix the situation.
CCBUG: 364447
Frédéric Brière (55e02a29) at 24 Jun 13:35
Get the plugin manager lock to actually work as intended
... and 67 more commits
objectName(), which is never called anywhere else throughout the code, apparently returns an empty string, so we just use pluginName() like everywhere else.
Frédéric Brière (7a0e2195) at 23 Jun 17:40
Properly display plugin name in "Deleting stale plugin" message
... and 66 more commits
Frédéric Brière (60df8281) at 22 Jun 14:39
Frédéric Brière (5a09543c) at 22 Jun 14:38
Display media for Tweets in search results
... and 7 more commits
Second, I didn't include the display of media, since I wasn't sure it it was absent from search items on purpose, or if this was just a simple omission that only got added to code A and not code B. (See previous remark.) I figured the safest option was to leave it out at first, and propose it in a separate MR.
On further thought, I'm pretty sure it was the latter, so I'll be a bit bold and push that commit onto the same branch after all, in order to keep things simple. (It's still left as a separate commit, though, just in case someone disagrees with my assessment.)
Frédéric Brière (de3801bb) at 21 Jun 14:20
Frédéric Brière (f9ff6a0b) at 21 Jun 14:13
Frédéric Brière (51a13030) at 21 Jun 14:11
Frédéric Brière (98b2437c) at 21 Jun 14:10
Frédéric Brière (27fd8ef8) at 21 Jun 14:07
I'll gladly take care of rebasing one after the other is merged.
Done and done!