Application - Marc Bouvier

[Zini]

Actually, it seems that we do have a bunch of warnings about unused variables in master currently. Sneaky buggers. No idea when they crept in. Really wish people would clean up their stuff, before sending a pull request.

[sirherrbatka]

Yes We do have. It showed up when I was compiling openmw today :/

[CramitDeFrog]

pvdk's suggestion to add QtSingleApplication looks like the easiest/best option. This component is now under the BSD license, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_License#3-clause. The only requirement is that the copyright notice will need to be included. Is this OK for this project?

Also, should this will be another dependency that is required to build OpenMW? Or, should this be included in the project somewhere? If so, where?

[psi29a]

Really wish people would clean up their stuff, before sending a pull request.

You're starting to sound like Linus, you should rant more to complete the experience.

[Zini]

pvdk's suggestion to add QtSingleApplication looks like the easiest/best option. This component is now under the BSD license, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_License#3-clause. The only requirement is that the copyright notice will need to be included. Is this OK for this project?

Also, should this will be another dependency that is required to build OpenMW? Or, should this be included in the project somewhere? If so, where?

Since we are dealing with a few files only and AFAIK this class is not part of any standard package under Linux (someone correct me if I am wrong here, please), I think just adding the files to the repository would be the best solution. Maybe apps/opencs/qtaddon ?

[Zini]

Really wish people would clean up their stuff, before sending a pull request.

You're starting to sound like Linus, you should rant more to complete the experience.

Okay. Will do my best.

[sirherrbatka]

@BrotherBrick
What have you done!

[CramitDeFrog]

Since we are dealing with a few files only and AFAIK this class is not part of any standard package under Linux (someone correct me if I am wrong here, please), I think just adding the files to the repository would be the best solution. Maybe apps/opencs/qtaddon ?

It looks like Arch, Fedora, and OpenSUSE have packages for it and Ubuntu does not. Adding a new folder is a clean option.

[psi29a]

Are we sure that it isn't included in Debian/Ubuntu, but under another package name? How would I go about testing for this? I would hate to have to include more duplicated code. If necessary, I would rather maintain the lib in our PPA until we can push it upstream to Debian.

How is it looking for OSX and Windows?

Update: According to this: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermai ... 01813.html QLockFile class exists in Qt5 so there are currently no plans to maintain qtsingleapplication in Debian (and Ubuntu). It will likely drop away from other distros as well.

The code examples you are talking about are *not* library code nor library
code quality.

So either we:
1) Migrate to Qt5, which was underway anyway.
2) Include the qtsingleapplication because we stick with Qt4, which is less attractive as no one is maintaining the code anyway.

More information about the LockFile class here:
http://doc-snapshot.qt-project.org/qt5- ... kfile.html

[CramitDeFrog]

Are we sure that it isn't included in Debian/Ubuntu, but under another package name? How would I go about testing for this? I would hate to have to include more duplicated code. If necessary, I would rather maintain the lib in our PPA until we can push it upstream to Debian.

How is it looking for OSX and Windows?

Update: According to this: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermai ... 01813.html QLockFile class exists in Qt5 so there are currently no plans to maintain qtsingleapplication in Debian (and Ubuntu). It will likely drop away from other distros as well.

The code examples you are talking about are *not* library code nor library
code quality.

So either we:
1) Migrate to Qt5, which was underway anyway.
2) Include the qtsingleapplication because we stick with Qt4, which is less attractive as no one is maintaining the code anyway.

More information about the LockFile class here:
http://doc-snapshot.qt-project.org/qt5- ... kfile.html

OSX and Windows will need be built from source, Homebrew nor MacPorts have it and their isn't a MSI. Including these files in the repo will be the best option even if OpenMW is migrated to Qt5. If that happens, then they can be ported over and only two additional classes (qtlocalpeer and qtsingleapplication) are need instead of three (qtlockedfile, qtlocalpeer, and qtsingleapplication).