-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
always create [Library],maximize_library #4355
Conversation
// Maximum buffer length to each EngineObject::process call. | ||
//TODO: Replace this with mixxx::AudioParameters::bufferSize() | ||
constexpr unsigned int MAX_BUFFER_LEN = 160000; | ||
|
||
constexpr int kMaxNumberOfDecks = 4; | ||
|
||
const ConfigKey kMaximizeLibraryConfigKey = ConfigKey("[Library]", "maximize_library"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's reduce redundancy if we rename it anyway.
Also, the active verb in maximize_library
makes it sound like a button (e.g. [ChannelN],hotcue_X_activate
), which means that you have to press [1.0] and release [0.0] to enable, the press and release again to disable.
But in this case it's actually a flag (1.0 = enabled, 0.0 = disabled). So I think we should use a passive verb here to indicate that (like we do in [ChannelN],loop_enabled
).
const ConfigKey kMaximizeLibraryConfigKey = ConfigKey("[Library]", "maximize_library"); | |
const ConfigKey kMaximizeLibraryConfigKey = ConfigKey("[Library]", "maximized"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see what you mean, but I think for consistency we should either name it like show_previewdeck
and other visibility controls -- or rename all to [Skin],library_maximized
, [Skin],previewdeck_visible
etc.
Btw despite the redundancy the benefit of maximize_library
is that the name of the control matches the tooltip which is convenient for skin development.
And actually the reason for using the [Library]
is solely that it's listed in the respective chapter in the manual, see the bug report. [Skin],maxmize_library
would be more appropriate IMO.
On that topic: I think we should rename the chapters to Deck controls
, Skin controls
etc., much like the submenus in the control picker menu. Also, the Group
elements in the chapters do decrease the readability IMHO, so I'd appreciate if we'd rename them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree. Since we are making an alias anyway, let's call it [Library], maximized
.
Btw this approach is a regression right now because the menu action is enabled regardless if the skin actually supplies that control. |
@Holzhaus Thanks for your objection, it made me realize this approach would somehow solve the bug but the root cause is elsewhere. |
Closing this because I'm not keen on fixing/extending VisibilityConnection and the skin/qml parser to fix the regression. |
If integration with the menu bar is causing problems, let's just remove the menu bar entry. The menu bar's days are limited anyway. |
@ronso0 do you want to finish this? If not, I will. |
Go ahead! |
A reason to keep the menubar button is that it makes If you remove the action add the shortcut to the tooltip (and bind the shortcut in coreservices, of course) mixxx/src/skin/legacy/tooltips.cpp Lines 277 to 279 in df735e0
|
Since actually all visibility controls created by (official) skins are affected we should consider a different approach. |
This PR is marked as stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. |
Superseeded by #4647 |
https://bugs.launchpad.net/mixxx/+bug/1941027