On 9/23/06, Steve Frécinaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > Can we use it as-is (or as well-defined cut'n'paste code) in GNOME 2.18 and
> > plan towards migrating to a GTK+ 2.12 version in GNOME 2.20? Let's at least
> > have a plan for it, otherwise we're just adding yet another
Jeff Waugh wrote:
> Can we use it as-is (or as well-defined cut'n'paste code) in GNOME 2.18 and
> plan towards migrating to a GTK+ 2.12 version in GNOME 2.20? Let's at least
> have a plan for it, otherwise we're just adding yet another [as above] with
> little active thought for our users, distribu
On Sat, 2006-09-23 at 19:39 +0200, Marco Barisione wrote:
> Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > Is this API appropriate for GTK+ and adaptable for use with Windows
> > and OS X?
>
> OS X could use the bacon backend (that uses Unix domain sockets).
>
> On Windows AF_UNIX is not available, but Windows has named
Jeff Waugh wrote:
> Is this API appropriate for GTK+ and adaptable for use with Windows
> and OS X?
OS X could use the bacon backend (that uses Unix domain sockets).
On Windows AF_UNIX is not available, but Windows has named pipes that
are more similar to sockets than to Unix named pipes. Howeve
brian muhumuza wrote:
>
> How do you guys feel about fleshing out Ideas on Topaz, understanding
> what it means and agreeing what it should be.
Thanks for these cool mockups
Unfortunately its going to be very difficult to get everyone to agree on
the way forward at this stage.
The best thing
How do you guys feel about fleshing out Ideas on Topaz, understanding what it means and agreeing what it should be.
--
Happy day-Brian
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/de
Pretty neat looking. At first blush, there seems to be a lot ofdependency on the mouse. I'm curious what your plans are for
keyboard-only access?Will
I tried as much as i could not to include details, just a general
picture. Keyboard access, among others which i have thought about at
one point i
Whatever crazy ideas people come up with, you can never guarantee thatthey are going to be universally better than what we currently have. As
such, with something as completely, drastically different, I see nobenefit in calling this GNOME 3.0.
Kind of nice you acknowledged it's different but differ
I think this question hits at the very heart of the issue with designinga whole new concept of "desktop." Not only do we have the whole mouse
vs. keyboard issue, but as software, we are limited by what hardware ourusers have access to. We can design a system that takes advantage of pencomputing, t
