On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:01:22 +0100 Vladimir Nadvornik <nadvor...@suse.cz> wrote:
[snip] > > My plan is to prefer desktop files from ~/.geeqie > Adding new command would mean copying an existing desktop file or a template > from documentation and editing it. I agree it is a bit more complicated > but it will easier to distribute the commands and share them among users. > > Another advantage is that the documentation can be put to the template > directly. > What do you mean by "a bit more complicated" ? I think possibility to use simple shell scripts should be preserved in any case. [snip] > > That is true. The original GQview thumbnail cache is significantly faster than > the standard. That's why we probably can't drop it completely. > Yes, because the "standard" is badly designed. [snip] > > > > 10.) The standard find-a-folder dialog boxes are different than the > > > ones that other desktop applications use. I'm running Gnome, but > > > non-Gnome applications like Firefox and even Emacs use the standard > > > interface. > > > > Oh, goodness. Geeqie is my last bastion of sanity. The Gnome file > > selectors suck. They may be standardized, but they suck royally. Geeqie's > > file selectors are actually useful and aren't a pain to use and don't suck. > > Please, please, please don't take them away. > > > > As one example, I have a very-commonly-traversed directory > > (~/files/media/graphics/photos/) with 524 sub-directories. With the geeqie > > file selector, it takes zero time to generate and show the listing, just > > like every other directory. With the Gnome file selector, it takes a full > > second _every single time_. > > > > So, let's say I'm looking at ~/files/media/graphics/photos/2009-01-12/ in > > the Gnome file selector. I click the "photos" button. 1 second passes, > > and then I can do something. I click the "2009-01-12" button. Now I click > > the "photos" button again. It _again_ takes an entire second before I can > > do something. So, for example, if I'm searching for the right date to put > > a file under, this starts to get on my nerves _really fast_. > > > > Hm, I would incline to a switch to the standard dialog, mostly because the > current code is hard to maintain. I will have to think about it. Any other > opinions? > Well, i agree with xsdg here, i don't like "standard" gtk dialogs that much (especially since they are slow and buggy on a regular basis, your mileage may vary). But you have a point: maintenance will be easier (or not....). I guess there is nothing urgent here, and i guess no one will provide a patch for that soon. -- Laurent MONIN aka Zas ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword _______________________________________________ Geeqie-devel mailing list Geeqie-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geeqie-devel
