[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Yevgen Muntyan wrote: > > >>While I'm on it, here is main thing why single window is not >>good: http://munt.mine.nu:8080/files/glade-sucks.png - you can't expand >>the properties window and widget tree; and note that the window is >>maximized, so I can't click anything behind it. >> >> >> > >Yevgen, most people who have commented on the new ui are excited by it, >and think it is a good step forward. Which group do we satisfy? the ~90% >who like the the new design or the ~10% who don't? > > It's not a good design, it's monkying gazpacho. Anyway, I just wanted to make sure that you know about those "10%". If majority loves single window, then you of course go single window. But I wonder, have someone actually tried to work with such UI? I did, in gazpacho, and it sucked. You can't use glade right now because of fancy bugs with click-does-nothing. So people "commented" on how it looks, not on the actual interface.
>With regard to your concerns about the constraints on the props editor >and tree, I think the excellent libgdl docking widgets can satisy that >problem. Then one can simply drag out the props editor into a window of >it's own, and then expand it as much as one likes. As such, with libgdl >it would be very possible to emulate the old multiple-window glade. > >However, we can't use the libgdl library as it is above gtk+ in the >stack and as it seems to be orientated towards the needs of the Anjuta >developers. I am very keen on working on gdl though, towards the goal of >making it suitable for our needs. > > Heh, "excellent". Well, let's call gdl excellent or even usable. Still, it has nothing to with glade, right? So, we can snip last two paragraphs, and stick to 10% thing. Best regards, Yevgen _______________________________________________ Glade-devel maillist - [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/glade-devel
