Using the super/windows key for keybindings
I'm currently writing an extension (for tiling windows) that I want to
add a lot of global keybindings for. There are two problems with this:
Firstly, it may be hard to get my work merged since I'm pretty sure
the only way it can currently be done is by adding to mutter's
all-keybindings.h, and the keybindings will be useless without my
extension. However, I'm sure a lot of other extensions could be in a
similar boat, and I'm hopeful that something can be done to make these
settings modifiable at runtime rather than baked in at compile time.
The bigger problem for my prototype right now is that I can't seem to
add any keybindings that work with the left super (windows) key. I've
tried adding both:
keybind (key_win_t, handle_win_t, 0, BINDING_PER_WINDOW,
"t", _("Win-t"))
and
keybind (key_win_t, handle_win_t, 0, BINDING_PER_WINDOW,
"t", _("Win-t"))
Both of these work and do indeed trigger my javascript callback when
the *right* super key is pressed (with "t"), but neither work when the
left super key is used.
Is this a known bug? Is there any way to work around it? I'm trying to
mimic the keyboard shortcuts for bluetile, so it's reasonably
important that I be able to use the super key in shortcuts...
Cheers,
- Tim.
___
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Workspaces slowing me down.
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 12:50 PM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: > On Sat, 2011-05-14 at 09:19 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: >> On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Milan Bouchet-Valat >> wrote: >> Le samedi 14 mai 2011 à 10:51 -0400, G. Michael Carter a écrit : >> > Usually I work on dual 24" monitors so I'll have maybe 2 virtual >> > windows open. But I was working on a laptop all this week and with >> > the 15" screen I've had about 9 workspaces going. >> > Moving between them I find is slowing me down in Gnome 3. >> > One thing slowing me down is when I need to go from 1 to 9. >> In System Settings->Keyboard->Shortcuts->Navigation, you can set >> keybindings to move to workspaces. Use something involving numbers, >>and you'll be able to get directly to the workspace you want. > > +1 problem is, after a while you forget which number workspace contains what windows since everything was created dynamically. One day you might have your music player workspace 2 one day it might be in workspace 5. > But I only see navigation shortcuts available for "Switch to workspace > 1" (which I assign to Alt-Shift-1) and "Switch to workspace 2" (which I > assign to Alt-Shift-2). I don't know how you'd add 3, 4, 5, etc... > > Generally I think a navigation shortcut for switch to last workspace > [where "last" is the highest numbered workstation, not the > chronologically previous] would be useful. Then one could jump all the > way down and one up [for example] vs. down, down, down, down, down. > >> That's probably the best solution, since people using many workspaces >> are relatively rare, and are able to customize their keybindings. Most >> users are likely to use only a few of them (I think, but of course >> I've no data on that). > > I believe this is true; I find that more than five starts to result in > a loss of productivity. I do not believe a human can effectively > multitask to that level [an individual may believe that they can - but > they're deluded]. you don't have to be working on all 9 at the same time. I have plenty of computer resources and leaving my windows open in its assigned workspace for later use is much more efficient than closing them all and reopening later. Nowadays it's common to have 8gb or RAM... if you're not leaving your applications open what's the point of it? >> 9 is a lot of desktops! > > +1 > >> I use a max of 6 I believe > > +1 > >> I never used the grid mode because it started getting complicated on >> where all my windows was. So then I send up panning around looking >> for whatever window I wanted. > > Exactly, a grid doesn't help. Then you just have to navigate in > multiple dimensions; that is worse, no better. I disagree, you set up each workspace for a certain purpose whether you have things open on it or not. You will always remember spacially which workspace is which and takes no thought to navigate to it. A real life analogy is someone that has a drawing desk, a computer desk, a writing desk, a filing desk and a desk with the tv. Each desk is stationary and you move to it as you need it. Granted sometimes you might have to reach over to another desk to grab something you need for the current task, but it's still more efficient. >> Honestly, I don't know if there is a particularly efficient way to >> deal with 9 workspaces that doesn't involve putting numbers or some >> other special function to deal with your particular workflow. > > Or... there is just no way to efficiently deal with 9 workspaces - > period. Although I don't need more than 6, there's a perfectly efficient way to use 9. You assign key shortcuts to your num key pad to match your gridded workspaces. You wont even have to navigate it with the arrows since it's already organized spatially, but even if you choose the arrows you can get to any workspace within 4 key strokes (that's going from corner to corner) as opposed to 9 in a vertical arrangement I think Gnome3 has a lot of potential, I love a lot of its functionality, the way to open applications... But not having a way to set up a gridded static workspace is reason enough for me not to use it. I tried it for over a month and I just could not get used to it. It made me way less efficient and really frustrated me when things just moved around on their own. I'm back to Compiz and fallback mode for now until an extension is made to provide the functionality (I wish I had the ability to do it myself). -- Diego Fernandez - 爱国 ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Workspaces slowing me down.
On Sat, 2011-05-14 at 09:19 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: > On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Milan Bouchet-Valat > wrote: > Le samedi 14 mai 2011 à 10:51 -0400, G. Michael Carter a écrit : > > Usually I work on dual 24" monitors so I'll have maybe 2 virtual > > windows open. But I was working on a laptop all this week and with > > the 15" screen I've had about 9 workspaces going. > > Moving between them I find is slowing me down in Gnome 3. > > One thing slowing me down is when I need to go from 1 to 9. > In System Settings->Keyboard->Shortcuts->Navigation, you can set > keybindings to move to workspaces. Use something involving numbers, >and you'll be able to get directly to the workspace you want. +1 But I only see navigation shortcuts available for "Switch to workspace 1" (which I assign to Alt-Shift-1) and "Switch to workspace 2" (which I assign to Alt-Shift-2). I don't know how you'd add 3, 4, 5, etc... Generally I think a navigation shortcut for switch to last workspace [where "last" is the highest numbered workstation, not the chronologically previous] would be useful. Then one could jump all the way down and one up [for example] vs. down, down, down, down, down. > That's probably the best solution, since people using many workspaces > are relatively rare, and are able to customize their keybindings. Most > users are likely to use only a few of them (I think, but of course > I've no data on that). I believe this is true; I find that more than five starts to result in a loss of productivity. I do not believe a human can effectively multitask to that level [an individual may believe that they can - but they're deluded]. > 9 is a lot of desktops! +1 > I use a max of 6 I believe +1 > I never used the grid mode because it started getting complicated on > where all my windows was. So then I send up panning around looking > for whatever window I wanted. Exactly, a grid doesn't help. Then you just have to navigate in multiple dimensions; that is worse, no better. > Honestly, I don't know if there is a particularly efficient way to > deal with 9 workspaces that doesn't involve putting numbers or some > other special function to deal with your particular workflow. Or... there is just no way to efficiently deal with 9 workspaces - period. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Critical Notifications
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 2:55 AM, Christopher Baines wrote: > When using notify-send to deliver critical notifications from a bash > script, I noticed that they do not really have the urgency I imagined. > They just seam to be a bit more persistent, I would think it better if > they flashed, pulsed or both. > > Any thoughts, > > My two cents is that having stuff like pulses and flashes defeats the purpose of "distraction free" design as it would be open to abuse. Critical notifications IMHO should always be only system events or events that that lead to data loss. Battery, disk full, etc. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Workspaces slowing me down.
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote: > Le samedi 14 mai 2011 à 10:51 -0400, G. Michael Carter a écrit : > > Usually I work on dual 24" monitors so I'll have maybe 2 virtual > > windows open. But I was working on a laptop all this week and with > > the 15" screen I've had about 9 workspaces going. > > > > > > Moving between them I find is slowing me down in Gnome 3. > > > > > > One thing slowing me down is when I need to go from 1 to 9. > In System Settings->Keyboard->Shortcuts->Navigation, you can set > keybindings to move to workspaces. Use something involving numbers, and > you'll be able to get directly to the workspace you want. > > That's probably the best solution, since people using many workspaces > are relatively rare, and are able to customize their keybindings. Most > users are likely to use only a few of them (I think, but of course I've > no data on that). > > 9 is a lot of desktops! I use a max of 6 I believe. I never used the grid mode because it started getting complicated on where all my windows was. So then I send up panning around looking for whatever window I wanted. Honestly, I don't know if there is a particularly efficient way to deal with 9 workspaces that doesn't involve putting numbers or some other special function to deal with your particular workflow. sri ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Workspaces slowing me down.
Le samedi 14 mai 2011 à 10:51 -0400, G. Michael Carter a écrit : > Usually I work on dual 24" monitors so I'll have maybe 2 virtual > windows open. But I was working on a laptop all this week and with > the 15" screen I've had about 9 workspaces going. > > > Moving between them I find is slowing me down in Gnome 3. > > > One thing slowing me down is when I need to go from 1 to 9. In System Settings->Keyboard->Shortcuts->Navigation, you can set keybindings to move to workspaces. Use something involving numbers, and you'll be able to get directly to the workspace you want. That's probably the best solution, since people using many workspaces are relatively rare, and are able to customize their keybindings. Most users are likely to use only a few of them (I think, but of course I've no data on that). Cheers ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Workspaces slowing me down.
Usually I work on dual 24" monitors so I'll have maybe 2 virtual windows open. But I was working on a laptop all this week and with the 15" screen I've had about 9 workspaces going. Moving between them I find is slowing me down in Gnome 3. One thing slowing me down is when I need to go from 1 to 9. The ALT-CTRL up/down takes forever, if I don't miss my stop in all the clicking. In Gnome 2 I just had a 3x3 grid for the workspaces. I put in a suggestion -- https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=647874 -- to make them a grid. Anyone know if there's a tweak to accomplish this now? The other things is the overview page. If your frequently moving from one workspace to another; hitting hot corner, moving to unhide workspaces, pausing to visually identify the window I need. Takes time. I realize I'm partly causing my own problem. If I put mail on 1, terminal on 2, ...etc I'd have an easier time finding it. But with the workspaces being dynamic, where they are now can switch over the course of a day. Anyone have any tips/tricks for staying organized? ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Critical Notifications
On Sat, 2011-05-14 at 13:34 +0300, Thanasis Georgiou wrote: > The difference is that urgent notifications display even when you have > set your status to 'Busy' in ghone-shell, while other notifications > don't. I just tried it and this seems to me the case. You are right. Also urgent notifications stay at the bottom center of the screen while normal notifications move to the summary on the right after a timeout. Florian ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Workspace-Indicator extension
Le mardi 10 mai 2011, à 10:44 -0400, Erick Pérez a écrit : > > Did you possibly intend to attach something to your mail? > > Marcel > > Yeah the uri, I forgot: > > Here it is: https://github.com/erick2red/shell-extensions It might make sense to submit it for integration with the gnome-shell-extensions repository: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell-extensions/ (file a bug against gnome-shell / extensions) Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Critical Notifications
The difference is that urgent notifications display even when you have set your status to 'Busy' in ghone-shell, while other notifications don't. I just tried it and this seems to me the case. Please correct me if I am wrong, Thanasis On Sat, 2011-05-14 at 10:55 +0100, Christopher Baines wrote: > When using notify-send to deliver critical notifications from a bash > script, I noticed that they do not really have the urgency I imagined. > They just seam to be a bit more persistent, I would think it better if > they flashed, pulsed or both. > > Any thoughts, > > Chris > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Critical Notifications
When using notify-send to deliver critical notifications from a bash script, I noticed that they do not really have the urgency I imagined. They just seam to be a bit more persistent, I would think it better if they flashed, pulsed or both. Any thoughts, Chris signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
