On Thu 18 Apr 2013 20:16, Nikita Churaev writes:
> newClass.__proto__ = this.constructor.prototype;
>
> where newClass is a function. Why does Gjs do this? Isn't this
> non-standard?
ES6 will standardize __proto__.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
___
de
Hi,
There has been a lot of traffic on d-d-l recently. That's great. It's
a bit difficult to follow though, at times. It would be really helpful
to a casual reader if, when replying, people would trim the parts of the
mails that they are quoting.
Cheers,
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
On Thu 22 Sep 2011 16:17, Colin Walters writes:
> "Ige-mac-bundler copies all of the files you indicated in your bundle
> file, and also pulls in the dependencies it can find, and it adjusts the
> install paths to reflect the new locations."
[...]
> You need to list the corresponding source cod
On Sun 04 Sep 2011 08:31, Xavier Cho writes:
> On a side note, I really like to see kind of a 'switchable' dock so I
> could change set of applications on it according to task currently I'm
> on. For example, when I do some music related work, I often use jackd
> related applications like ardour,
On Fri 19 Aug 2011 13:33, Felipe Contreras writes:
> That's a reasonable alternative. How about "pleased"? Any other people
> have an opinion?
You present yourself as reasonable by adjusting on the small points,
but you ignore the feedback of greater importance.
My opinion is that you are not t
Hi Alan,
FWIW I mostly like GNOME 3, so I don't want to pile on the flamefest.
But this bothered me:
On Sun 06 Feb 2011 15:27, Allan Day writes:
> Even if you had records of every discussion, you wouldn't get the
> information you're looking for. Design decisions don't get made
> committee meet
On Mon 31 Jan 2011 22:03, Frederic Crozat writes:
> 2011/1/31 Andy Wingo :
>> Regardless of the ultimate decision -- NB, not being discussed at
>> language-bindi...@gnome.org -- the lack of communication from the
>> release team is lamentable.
>
> And this kind of
On Mon 31 Jan 2011 14:59, Murray Cumming writes:
>> > - there is no stronger API/ABI rules, but it's true we'd like to have
>> >gtkmm follow the schedule.
I am also surprised at the lack of rules here, and additionally, the
lack of discussion. Without the rules, it's just languages that pe
Hi Steve,
On Mon 04 Oct 2010 13:10, Steve Frécinaux writes:
> I'd like to propose libpeas as part of the desktop release set, or
> whatever the release team cooked to replace it in Gnome 3.0.
Libpeas sounds really neat :)
Did you solve the toggle refs issue that Owen brought up?
Andy
--
http
On Thu 19 Aug 2010 13:09, Jiří Techet writes:
> right now libchamplain has the version number as a part of its name,
> e.g. libchamplain-0.7.so.
If you encode a version into the name, use the stable version. If 0.7 is
a stable series, use -0.7 in the name. Otherwise if it is a development
series
Greets :)
A couple points of clarification:
On Wed 14 Jul 2010 21:45, Christian Persch writes:
> [In] copyright assignment, you don't have *any* guarantees about the
> terms the new 'owner' may choose to distribute your work under.
Not true! For example, when you assign to the FSF, the papers
Hello,
On Tue 06 Jul 2010 14:54, Holger Berndt writes:
> On Tue, 06 Jul 2010 09:00:09 -0400 Ryan Lortie wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 09:26 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
>> > Do you feel okay with the idea of allowing proprietary apps to use
>> > our platform but not GPLv2 apps?
>>
>> In short
On Mon 14 Jun 2010 12:57, Sebastien Bacher writes:
> Le lundi 14 juin 2010 à 11:38 +0100, Bastien Nocera a écrit :
>> That's not a decision for the software writers to make when their code
>> is in the GNOME release.
>
> Why would GNOME tell software writers that their code can't have build
> ti
Hi Vincent,
On Wed 02 Jun 2010 01:38, Vincent Untz writes:
> + gjs (desktop)
>=> approved, but with other bindings (not desktop)
Does this mean that gjs will follow API/ABI stability guarantees of
other parts of the GNOME platform, or of the old Bindings releases?
Cheers,
Andy
--
http:/
Hi Mikkel,
On Thu 22 Apr 2010 21:40, Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen
writes:
> Here's what we do. We set a series of milestones and target bugs and
> blueprints to these milestones. We also attach branches (not patches)
> to bugs and blueprints. When a linked branch is ready to merge into
> another b
Hi Tomeu,
On Thu 14 Jan 2010 16:29, Tomeu Vizoso writes:
> Pygi is still far away from being an usable replacement of static
> bindings, at the current development rate.
Why is that? Is the gobject-inspection metadata not expressive enough,
or does pygi not implement all that gobject-introspect
Hi,
On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 18:26 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Plugin vs extension?
[...]
> My €0.02: I think that people are getting used to the Extension term,
> and it sounds less geeky.
Extension has the advantage that there's only one way to spell it (as
opposed to plugin vs plug-in).
A mino
Hey Calum,
On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 16:41 +0100, Calum Benson wrote:
> I'd appreciate it if you read through the parts of the a11y
> guide [3] that apply
Wow, nice link. I wasn't aware of this document.
Thanks!
Andy.
--
http://wingolog.org/
___
desktop
Hi,
On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 16:11 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>parallel-instabllable is the worst idea of software development.
See http://ometer.com/parallel.html for the reasons why GNOME does it
this way.
Regards,
--
Andy Wingo
http://win
Hi,
On Mon, 2006-07-17 at 10:57 +0200, Philip Van Hoof wrote:
> Please do not reply to this message on the mailing list.
Please don't pontificate. Your holier-than-thou tone is tiring.
--
Andy Wingo
http://wingolog.org/
___
desktop-de
said this, but I don't think all people uncomfortable
with mono would agree.
> I would like to remind them that
> gnome-games, long included by default on every Linux distribution,
> depends on Scheme (the guile bindings).
AFAIU it only depends on guile, not the guile bindings to the
On Wed, 2006-07-12 at 22:36 -0400, Joseph E. Sacco, Ph.D. wrote:
[gtkmm breakage with new gnome-vfs]
> Turns out to be caused by the bonobo changes in gnome-vfs-2.15.3
This happened to the python bindings as well, and likely will happen for
other bindings...
--
Andy Wingo
http://wingolog.
(http://gnu.org/software/guile-gnome/)
Cheers,
--
Andy Wingo
http://wingolog.org/
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
he overhead for all users, or just the user who runs
> gst-inspect-0.10?
Just that user -- so that's probably not a good idea (ie when does root
run media apps?). Multi-user systems will have a startup penalty for
each user.
Regards,
--
Andy Wingo
http://wingolog.org/
___
Hi me,
On Fri, 2006-02-10 at 10:04 +0100, Andy Wingo wrote:
> Depending on your machine it might take
> a couple seconds to get everything registered.
Hm, I should clarify before the flames arrive: in the normal case, when
the mtimes of the plugins haven't changed, and the set of plu
the registry in 0.10, so no more
post-installation hooks are needed in distro packages.
Regards,
--
Andy Wingo
http://wingolog.org/
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
I don't know what Ronald's plans are.
Regards,
--
Andy Wingo
http://wingolog.org/
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
27 matches
Mail list logo
