Re: Module Proposal: GNOME Shell

2010-04-06 Thread Luca Ferretti
Il giorno mar, 30/03/2010 alle 19.16 -0400, Owen Taylor ha scritto: > Dependencies: > Mutter: Will be proposed as a desktop release set module > GJS: Will be proposed as a desktop release set module > gobject-introspection: Will be proposed as a desktop release set module Maybe I've misses it,

Re: Module Proposal: GNOME Shell

2010-04-06 Thread Emmanuele Bassi
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 10:54 +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote: > Il giorno mar, 30/03/2010 alle 19.16 -0400, Owen Taylor ha scritto: > > > Dependencies: > > Mutter: Will be proposed as a desktop release set module > > GJS: Will be proposed as a desktop release set module > > gobject-introspection: Wil

Re: Module Proposal: GNOME Shell

2010-04-06 Thread Paul Cutler
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 02:52 +0100, Alberto Ruiz wrote: > 2010/4/6 Andrew Cowie : > > Anyway, I think you're on the right track to presume 3D capability, but > > I don't think we should be so dismissive of concerns from people on less > > capable hardware or those who are remoting or virtualized. Es

Re: Module Proposal: GNOME Shell

2010-04-06 Thread Sriram Ramkrishna
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 5:29 AM, Paul Cutler wrote: > > I think Alberto's idea of reaching out to nVidia is a great idea - if we > can clearly communicate our needs to them it can't hurt to ask. I'd be > willing to help reach out to them if needed. Maybe I missed it but why are we only concentr

Re: Module Proposal: GNOME Shell

2010-04-06 Thread Johannes Schmid
Hi! > Maybe I missed it but why are we only concentrating on Nvidia? Are > ATI graphics cards okay vis-a-vis xrand support and others on free > drivers? What about Intel? The foundation should probably take a > holistic approach to this issue if we want a uniform experience for > GNOME 3. > We

Re: GSoC Proposal: Scripting Framework for Applications

2010-04-06 Thread Johannes Schmid
Hi! > I am not entirely sure but my guess is adding support for another > language would require modifications to all the applications > individually that want its support to be included. As far as I have > read (I apologize if I am wrong) GObject-introspection just makes > language bindings pret

Re: Module Proposal: GNOME Shell

2010-04-06 Thread Owen Taylor
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 11:40 +1000, Andrew Cowie wrote: > On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 09:24 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > > > Let me phrase it a little differently then - it's not a problem that > > GNOME is able to fix. If there is demand, I assume NVIDIA will work on > > xrandr support. > > Yeah, but gi

Re: Module Proposal: GNOME Shell

2010-04-06 Thread Owen Taylor
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 08:44 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 5:29 AM, Paul Cutler wrote: > I think Alberto's idea of reaching out to nVidia is a great > idea - if we can clearly communicate our needs to them it > can't hurt to ask. I'd be willing

Re: GSoC Proposal: Scripting Framework for Applications

2010-04-06 Thread Maciej Piechotka
On Tue, 2010-04-06 at 18:24 +0200, Johannes Schmid wrote: > Hi! > > > > I am not entirely sure but my guess is adding support for another > > language would require modifications to all the applications > > individually that want its support to be included. As far as I have > > read (I apologize

Re: GSoC Proposal: Scripting Framework for Applications

2010-04-06 Thread Johannes Schmid
Hi! > You still need to add support by hand - otherwise there would be no > 'javascript only' gnome-shell. Well, the shell is javascript-only because it is itself written in javascript. You cannot bind anything to Javascript, you can just bind it to C. gnome-shell is a mutter plugin, mutter is wr