On 1/22/10 8:51 AM, Calum Benson wrote:
Hmm, why do you need to press Option as well? I thought we were talking about
Ctrl+PgUp/PgDn, which is a three key combo (Fn+Ctrl+Up/Dn, with Fn+Ctrl
co-adjacent) on any Mac laptop I've used recently.
Cheeri,
Calum.
I got it slightly wrong. On Mac'
On 1/18/10 7:22 AM, Reinout van Schouwen wrote:
Let me make it clear that I'm not against mapping
Ctrl+Tab to tab cycling as long as the current shortcuts are still
available *and* under the condition that a proper substitute for moving
widget focus is found.
Cool.
So it is the apps that crea
On 1/15/10 10:51 AM, Reinout van Schouwen wrote:
>
> Most Mac and Win installations _don't_ include a copy of it and still it
> tries to fit into the environment it's running on.
Yes...and it uses Ctrl-Tab. Remember this whole thread is about Ctrl-Tab.
>
>> If GNOME used Ctrl-Shift-X for Copy,
On 1/15/10 11:44 AM, Calum Benson wrote:
>
> On 15 Jan 2010, at 13:07, Jud Craft wrote:
>
>> It really is a nightmarish combination on MacBooks.
>
> No worse than any of the Cmd-Opt-Letter combinations that many Mac
apps have, surely?
>
Well, with Ctrl+Option+Fn+D
On 1/15/10 9:33 AM, Calum Benson wrote:
>
> Ah ok. That type of preference dialog is actually using a toolbar,
not a tab control, which does have the keynav you describe.
>
> I was talking about (for example) the Universal Access preferences,
which has four "proper" tabs (Seeing, Hearing, Keyb
On 1/14/10 6:00 PM, Reinout van Schouwen wrote:
Op dinsdag 12-01-2010 om 20:01 uur [tijdzone -0500], schreef Jud Craft:
Due to its ubiquity, the conflict is very evident in GNOME programs,
where the behavior is completely different, even on the same Linux
operating system - between Epiphany
On 1/14/10 12:20 PM, Calum Benson wrote:
Dialog-level tabs, as found in many of Apple's system preference windows, do
not have any direct keynav AFAIK. You just have to Tab through the dialog
until the tab control gets focus, then use the arrow keys+Space to switch to a
different tab.
Cal
On 1/14/10 6:12 PM, Reinout van Schouwen wrote:
Ctrl+PgUp/PgDn to switch tabs is hard wired in my head so I may be
biased, but based on my own experience it's not inconvenient at all.
regards,
It really is a nightmarish combination on MacBooks.
___
On 1/13/10 8:15 AM, Olivier Le Thanh Duong wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Luca Ferretti wrote:
>> Il giorno dom, 22/11/2009 alle 16.32 -0800, Sandy Armstrong ha scritto:
>>
>>> Most users I've spoken to about this prefer ctrl+tab because it is
>>> similar to alt+tab, and can be invoked
On 1/13/10 6:25 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
Hi Jud,
Thanks for bringing this up.
How about: those who care come up with a replacement combination for focus
navigation in GTK+, and a patch to implement ctrl+tab to change tabs, and
submit that fo
I hate to force open an old topic, but this recently came up as an
Ubuntu launchpad bug for their Paper Cuts project. [1]
The essence of the problem is that while Ctrl-Tab is reserved by GTK for
keyboard navigation, it has also been claimed by many popular
applications on Windows, Mac, and Li
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Jud Craft wrote:
> Does every GTK program that makes use of a text-entry in a side-pane
> face this dilemma? Like MonoDevelop or Brasero?
>
I'll go ahead and add this: although it has an amazing amount of
keyboard shortcuts, MonoDevelop's
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:33 AM, Paolo Borelli wrote:
> Well, I'd be happy to drop such hacks, but right now it is a "less of
> two evils" situation... without that hack pressing ctrl+v in a text
> entry in the sidepane would be pasted in the main text area. I'd love to
> have a good solution to t
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> If you pay attention to where this discussion started, you will see
> that that is not the case. The starting point was a request to
> increase conflicting uses of Ctrl-Tab...
Yes, I see. But I am merely saying that, sparing the tab-interf
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> To clear up some of the confusion here, the difference is not how you
> can _enter_ the toolbar, it is how you can leave the widget before it.
> Gedits content pane needs to accept tab as input, thus you are
> required to use Ctrl-tab to lea
On another note related to the widget-group problem, consider GEdit
and Rhythmbox, specifically their toolbars, and arrow key navigation
of a toolbar.
In GEdit, I can enter the toolbar using tab and ctrl-tab. I can only
exit it using tab (ctrl-tab, which should get into anything, gets
stuck in
[I apologize, this should have gone to the list. I really have to
watch the Reply-to-All button in Gmail.]
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
>> You can tab into a ListView, but not shift-tab (only
>> into the headers), and not being able to tab through toolbar buttons
>
> Fi
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Andre Klapper wrote:
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=HIG
Ah. I formerly heard to try against GTK. I'll need to do some bug
changes, but I don't see much use in a user filing a problem with the
HIG. Is that even a good idea?
My belief was that
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Calum Benson wrote:
> For gtk, we tried to strike the best balance we could between not throwing
> away peoples' prior keynav knowledge, ironing out their internal
> inconsistencies, and filling in the gaps as logically as we could for things
> that they missed or
On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> They have all been CLOSED WONTFIX consistently. The
> reason for not doing that by default is that currently ctrl+tab is used to
> change focus when tab itself is consumed by a widget (text area, etc. vte
> currently doesn't do that, but t
>> We will have an application menu at the top of the screen that will
>> serve the purpose of identifying the application.
>
> Huh.
>
> A what?
>
> Is this like the Global Menu (that works great, incidentally) that was
> just rejected by release-team GNOME since it wasn't compatible with
> GNOME S
> Vendors had 4 months head-way to test for changes, and fix them. If 4
> months isn't enough, I'm not sure how much advance warning we need to
> give for something so easily fixable.
4 months isn't a single GNOME release cycle. How would they get
end-user feedback?
What about GNOME software ven
> I didn't tell anyone to hack around it. There's a (bad) UI for reverting
> the change called gconf-editor. If it's not good enough, people can add
> features to gTweakUI or write their own.
I'm aware of gconf-editor. But saying a user has to go mess with the
keys is pretty much a dumping ground
> I think most of the anger in this thread stems from the fact that "it's
> changed". Well, progress comes through changes, and nothing was ever
> achieved with status quo.
>
> Maybe we'll change our minds later, but without compelling arguments,
> it's hard to make a case for reverting this change
> It's not forbidden and in fact, in 2.28, you can still change this
> option through the appearance capplet.
I think you may be mistaken. I'm running GNOME 2.28 on Fedora 12 and
the Appearance Properties no longer allow you to do this, since the
Interface options mentioned above have been remove
> you're missing the point: the option already exists in GConf. all that
> is needed is a UI tweak utility that can be optionally installed.
Not sure I understand the discussion here. GNOME -had- UI to tweak
this option, and suddenly decided not to support configuring it in the
main desktop.
I a
On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Luis Menina wrote:
> 7. Who would do the work ? As someone already explained, this is not how
> things work in a community. The ones who decide are not the ones who want,
> but the ones who actually do the job.
I do agree with most of your points, with this caveat:
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Andre Klapper wrote:
> ...so Bugsquad and developers move it to the correct product.
> Happens sometimes and will always happen.
> In this context I don't see an argument related to this discussion.
I'm of the opinion voiced by Johannes. An intimidating issue
submi
There is one good reason why this is a good idea: GNOME's support
system is too compartmentalized.
This shows up all the time in bug reports. People have no idea which
component to file against (for particularly tricky situations, even
developers have to do some investigation before they arrive
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Pierre Slamich wrote:
> The current behavior of GlobalMenu's applet, with all menu items listed in a
> row, does look different from Gnome Shell's application item. There is
> already an submitted issue [1] suggesting to merge all items into one popup
> submenu, as
Er... KVM?
On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:13 PM, Alberto Ruiz wrote:
>
> OpenGL is already supported by the major desktop virtualization apps
> out there like VirtualBox or VMWare if that's what you mean.
>
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-l
Also, does this mean that virtualization of a GNOME-shell environment
is out for the near future now?
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> (BTW, the very few exceptions I mentioned above are probably IM and
> email notifications. Many people receive such a high volume of
> emails/IMs that it is probably a good idea to allow them to disable
> these sounds in the application)
On the topic of visual garbage, I've read over all of the relevant Qt
posts again for 4.6, and I do admit that it certainly seems fixed
upstream [1]. My mistake for being underinformed, although the
comments on bugs.kde.org and Ubuntu launchpad means that I suppose it
hasn't trickled down yet, or
On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 12:24 PM, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
>
> This has been fixed for quite some time including on KDE so "out in the
> cold" would be false hyperbole.
I apologize. Referring to the video garbage issue, by reading the two
bug reports I linked I can still see people who respond sayi
Don't forget that the composited desktop itself on Linux still has
some inherent flaws.
Like that whole "video garbage" thing, that still shows glitches in
OpenOffice even on Fedora 11 on an Intel 965, and leaves KDE out in
the cold.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/xorg-server/+bug/25446
This might be the wrong list, but I've been interested in making a panel applet.
The tutorials here [1] and here [2] both are beginning tutorials in
applet development, but they both use Bonobo. I am aware that
previously Bonobo was a common part of GNOME applets.
Since there are efforts to depr
On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 16:23 +0200, Tomasz Torcz wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 10:54:43PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
>> One man's crack is another's basic functionality.
>
> Note that "Crack" was in quotes. I think it's legitimate for adva
38 matches
Mail list logo
