That said, let's hear the opinion of someone else as well.

umbrello from binary factory is far from been production ready. Windows releases are made from the KDE4 branch. See for example https://phabricator.kde.org/T7659

At this point, I'd rather give my -1 to this. The 4.x kdelibs stack is *long* unmaintained, as well as Qt. What are real, compelling reasons to do this?

As a packager: messing up with user configuration without a clear migration path is a no-no.

LGTM; just a minor change needed.

+1.

In general (for my limited Baloo knowledge) this makes sense. You might want to add a few CCBUGs if you are aware of specific bugs this alleviates (@ngraham or someone from the bugsquad may help).

Generally looks OK to me, one note on QDir::separator() usage.

In D16393#348754, @ognarb wrote:

In D16393#348712, @mlaurent wrote:

Otherwise it seems ok for me. (Fix just public to private and commit after that)

Should I request developers access?

The changes look sane to me. Perhaps wait a couple more days until any other objection is raised, then if not, commit away.

+1, but I'd like to hear people more experienced than me.

+1, looks fine to me as far as I understand.

Looks OK to me.

I tried to merge this to master but there the Akonadi DB scheme version is already higher (37), should it be bumped also there?

As this is a visual change, please add screenshots (one for before, one for the after).

+1, but someone else must approve.

LGTM.

I don't understand well the is part of home stuff, do you mean checking for things out of /home?

I would suggest pushing this as a branch of the main kio-extras repository (is your clone just a clone of kio-extras with your changes on top?) to ensure it doesn't get "lost" (and would make merging easier). Eventually a Phabricator diff would also help for people reviewing the code.

@mlaurent fixed it already with 6656ae1449c8743243391d15dca41a912e2aecd3.

+1

+1

In D15093#315885, @andersonbruce wrote:

Some smallish nitpicks I noticed there. Also, does this mean that NM has WG support now?

+1

@steinalexander: Do you have commit access? Or do you need any of the developers to commit this for you?

I did an accept to undo my earlier "Changes required" because Phab messed up the lines I commented on, and because I realized I wasn't commenting on your specific changes. Sorry about that.

I'm backporting it. Before I push: will this work also with previous KIO versions?

I wonder if this is related to timeline:/ no longer working properly in the file dialog. (didn't investigate yet).

@ltoscano The question was asked due to a bad merge in plasma-desktop, which needed a force push. This commit was originally in the branch, but no longer due to this. Hence, the question: should it be added back?

I had a quick chat with notmart about this (without going into much detail) and this is the outcome:

Yes, that will need to get packaged. We'll keep you posted.

What's the easiest way to test this? I might just patch the package and see what happens.

Use QVariant

There's almost nothing done yet mainly because I want to gather feedback first on what the approach should be (to avoid doing work that won't be useful).

For now I reverted the commit in kwin to allow building. Once this review is merged, it can be re-instated.