In D20677#453140, @apol wrote:

LGTM, anothher fix could have been wrapping them with parenthesis?

Thanks :)

In T10812#182201, @ngraham wrote:

If you're suggesting that Kubuntu could change their versioning scheme, that's a tacit admission that you do think there's a problem (otherwise there would be no suggestion of a proposed change or solution). It's a problem from a user perspective for just the reason I gave: users confuse our app versions with Ubuntu's own version numbers. "Confused users" is a problem. I agree that it's not a huge issue but I think it is an issue. Maybe it's not worth fixing. But it's an issue.

Apps that are in the bundle have inconsistent versioning; most use the bundle's own versioning scheme, but others use their own

In D20641#452130, @apol wrote:

Should maybe warn if it fails?

Christoph, what do you think?

Does this hide the existing "Click on a Bit to toggle it." tooltip?

@joergbuchwald you mentioned "work will be continued/completed in next weeks", is this still true or should this be commited?

Do you think you could include this in the tests/lauri.xml and lauri.po?

One-off donations goes inside on the section of donations types. Where the user sees how he/she can donate.

In T10636#181900, @paulb wrote:

@cfeck : Will this be the link you will use for the announcement?:

https://kde.org/announcements/announce-applications-19.04.0.php

i have not tested it, if you think it works, i guess it's ok from the pure code point of view.

In D20519#450066, @dfaure wrote:

Any input on my "cleaner solution: return a two-field structs" suggestion?

put it on the stable branch too?

In D20437#448028, @kezik wrote:

It's the first time after years and dozen of contributions to dozen of projects that I see such a fuss about my internet name

@aacid if I put my relicensing preferences on the kde dev script repo, will you consider the patch?

In D20437#447843, @ngraham wrote:

In D20437#447774, @aacid wrote:

Still has a fake name attached to it?

If so i'll refrain from looking at the code and getting tainted by it.

Can you clarify how reviewing this patch would taint you?

there's 3 more checks for "Untitled" in that file. Could you check if those need updating too?

update with test from dfaure + local tweak

In D20519#449595, @dfaure wrote:

Good catch.
I'd still prefer if such changes would come with a unittest, because it will be hard otherwise to immediately detect (while developing) that changes don't introduce any regressions.
I managed to write a unittest for this one, please integrate it into your commit:

http://www.davidfaure.fr/2019/ktar_unittest.diff

hmmmm, ok, i don't know why we wouldn't want things like this to now show in the autogenerated changelog, but ok, your call :)

In D20489#449216, @dfaure wrote:

FYI NO_CHANGELOG doesn't have to be in the first line (which would make noise in phab review titles for new requests, etc). It can be a line of its own, for example towards the end of the commit log.

Thanks!