[packagekit] QT bindings : restart from scratch, but they're coming back :-p

Adrien BUSTANY madcat at mymadcat.com
Fri Oct 19 16:09:07 PDT 2007

Richard Hughes a écrit :
> On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 00:47 +0200, Adrien BUSTANY wrote:
>> Hi there,
>> I recently received a mail from Kevin Krammer, a KDE developper. He told 
>> me than binding libpackagekit by wrapping the functions and the glib 
>> loop inside Qt was not the best thing, and said that using the DBus 
>> interface would be cleaner and would make it easier for KDE devs to use 
>> the lib.
> Sure. This means I have to be more careful with the DBUS interface
> API :-)
A documentation would be really nice. pk-applications's code's quite 
readable, but a real doc would be a plus. OTOH, once we get a Gtk and a 
Qt interface, maybe it won't be of great interest...
>> As I don't wan't to write some unusable, unmaintainable piece 
>> of software I started the bindings again, from scratch, using the DBus 
>> interface. I fighted a bit with some C++ things, but I finally managed 
>> to get the skeleton of the lib, and implemented search (with filters) as 
>> an example. I used my interface mockup (which will become the real 
>> interface) to command the lib.
> Cool.
>> I now need to tell the interface to put the results in a model (they're 
>> printed to the console for now), and I'll be more or less done for 
>> search (I'll have to implement groups, but yum doesn't seem to support 
>> them). Then I'll list the function present in libpackagekit and 
>> implement them in the Qt bindings.
> There's no need to do them all, libpackagekit is a convenience library
> after all. I would only do the ones you use.
Yep. For now my approach has been : I want to implement function x, 
which depends on y and z, so bind z, y, then x. Maybe I can continue 
that way.
>> I'll also have to implement the 
>> policykit bits, I know there's a policykit-gnome package but I don't 
>> know if there's one for KDE (I'm a GNOME user).
> What's the KDE naming policy? Do you want to create a QT binding for the
> lib and a KPackageKit for the UI bits? Reusing QPackageKit would be
> great.
No idea. I don't want to create a KPackageKit for now, as I said I'm a 
GNOME user, I don't even have KDE libs installed on my box. QPackageKit 
is a lib and a frontend, the lib will be easily reusable if KDE devs 
want to extend the interface. So I'm sticking to QPackageKit.
>> That's all for today, see you for the next report :-)
> Keep up the good work :-)
I'm very motivated. I got some schoolwork in Ada, it's quite a pain :-) 
C++ unwinds me...
> Richard.

More information about the PackageKit mailing list