Change the organisation name

[dcaliste]

Change the organisation name to sailfishos-applications. Also change the QSettings objects to use the application organisation name.

Add some code to automatically migrate the data from the old directories to the new ones, defined by #21 and by changing the organisation name.

This should fix #50.

Before accepting this MR, we need to agree on the organisation name. Your proposition to use the github location looks fine. I'm just wondering if the code would be used one day outside of Sailfish (need to rewrite the UI, I know...), does this organisation name still makes sense ? Migration code are a bit error prone to write :-/

[Olf0]

LGTM, with my quite limited C++ knowledge and experience.

[Olf0]

Your proposition to use the github location looks fine. I'm just wondering if the code would be used one day outside of Sailfish (need to rewrite the UI, I know...), does this organisation name still makes sense ?

My points are:

• FlowPlayer is mostly about UI, as today every desktop (Gnome, KDE etc.) comes with a MediaPlayer.
• FlowPlayer is extremely QML-heavy, so the only target it may technically make sense to port to is KDE Plasma Mobile; still one would have to replace all Silica calls with new calls and likely also adaption-code.
• Even if FlowPlayer becomes ported to a non-SailfishOS platform, I see no reason why its origin should be hidden: It is a ported SailfishOS-application then.

The second option would be to use flowplayer as organisation, as many desktop- and SailfishOS-apps do; but as you stated in issue #47, organisation == application is a bit silly duplication.

Migration code are a bit error prone to write :-/

Thank you, that you did write quite some migration code: This is really nice to users. 😃
_{As stated before, as the first version field always has been zero and all v0.3.x releases have been marked as release candidates, IMO a prominent notice about the (again) altered DB & Config locations would have been sufficient, hence no migration code strictly necessary.}

[Olf0]

Before accepting this MR, we need to agree on the organisation name.

Did we discuss that sufficiently in your opinion?
BTW, I am out of additional arguments to the ones I named.

If this is fine for you, I will merge this PR tonight.

[dcaliste]

Sorry, I didn't reply. I'm fine with your arguments. No objection ! I just wanted to be sure that the decision was clear and its pros and cons discussed. It seems it is. So let's go…