Nelson Benítez wrote:
Alexander Larsson wrote:
If we divide nautilus-action between backend (gconf entries that defines
menu items in nautilus) and frontend (nautilus-actions ui for edit those
gconf entries) I think the proper solution would be to integrate the
backend part into nautilus
On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 23:58 +0100, Chipzz wrote:
Gnome application is coming up with its own plug-in
framework-- thus needlessly duplicating work.
That's another thing - but weither that is possible... ?
it is perfectly possible. There is a try in the gnome-office module in
CVS, which
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Steve Frécinaux wrote:
Pat Suwalski wrote:
Maybe it's time for a gedit-lite that bears much more resemblance to
Windows notepad than where gedit is going.
You must agree that Notepad is just a piece of crap.
It absolutely is not. When on windows (which is not very
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Paolo Borelli wrote:
support disabled. That said we think that python support is a really
important feature and it's having a huge success (I have seen more
plugins in the last month than in the last two years). I'd love that
A comment here which not only refers to gedit,
Chipzz wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Paolo Borelli wrote:
support disabled. That said we think that python support is a really
important feature and it's having a huge success (I have seen more
plugins in the last month than in the last two years). I'd love that
A comment here which not only
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006, Jamie McCracken wrote:
Chipzz wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Paolo Borelli wrote:
support disabled. That said we think that python support is a really
important feature and it's having a huge success (I have seen more
plugins in the last month than in the last two years).
On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 11:17 +0100, Chipzz wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Paolo Borelli wrote:
support disabled. That said we think that python support is a really
important feature and it's having a huge success (I have seen more
plugins in the last month than in the last two years). I'd
Chipzz wrote:
A comment here which not only refers to gedit, but also to those other
apps which are creating plugins: do we actually have a standard consis-
tant cross-application framework for scripting? I don't know how good
VBA is at this, but I think we cannot have a different approach for
Hi,
--- Emmanuele Bassi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 11:17 +0100, Chipzz wrote:
snip
A comment here which not only refers to gedit, but
also to those other
apps which are creating plugins: do we actually
have a standard consis-
tant cross-application framework for
Hi,
On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 13:59 -0800, aigiskos wrote:
Hi,
--- Emmanuele Bassi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With python or perl or ruby or haskell or scheme we
have an entire
language with its own entire framework (for perl,
think CPAN) with its
own community of developers. VBA is
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006, aigiskos wrote:
Hi,
--- Emmanuele Bassi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 11:17 +0100, Chipzz wrote:
snip
A comment here which not only refers to gedit, but
also to those other
apps which are creating plugins: do we actually
have a standard
Quoting aigiskos [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I believe Chipzz was *not* suggesting that we adopt
VBA as a de-facto scripting language for Gnome.
Rather, I think he was suggesting that Gnome offer a
common plug-in framework or API into which all
applications can hook. I.e. He is worried that each
Gnome
Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
On Sun, 2006-01-15 at 11:17 +0100, Chipzz wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Paolo Borelli wrote:
support disabled. That said we think that python support is a really
important feature and it's having a huge success (I have seen more
plugins in the last month than in
Alexander Larsson wrote:
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 13:10 +0100, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ nautilus-actions: there were some questions wrt to how it's
integrated in nautilus. Some people wanted it to be integrated in some
other way. No consensus,
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
I will leave out dependency libraries from my thoughts, support of an
application is support of the dependencies.
+ atomix: I don't remember seeing much discussion for this one. What do
people think? Is Callum here? What do you think?
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 17:55 +1300, John Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 22:47 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
+ gnome-screensaver: people want this. I'd say we should go with it
and
I believe it's the general consensus, but maybe some people think it's
not ready yet?
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 01:08 +0100, Paolo Borelli wrote:
Il giorno gio, 12/01/2006 alle 01.02 +0100, Murray Cumming ha scritto:
I don't understand how the python gtksourceview bindings are being used
by gedit. Is it used by the plugin system or by a plugin that is
supplied with gedit?
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ fast-user-switch-applet: I think people were okay with it. It'd be
nice to integrate it in the panel, but I'm not sure it will happen
because of lack of time (flame me).
I think there is already a patch for it.
+
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 17:55 +1300, John Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 22:47 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
+ gnome-screensaver: people want this. I'd say we should go with it
and
I believe it's the general consensus, but maybe some people think it's
not ready yet?
Em Qui, 2006-01-12 às 00:06 +, Alan Horkan escreveu:
I have some criticisms of it none of which are show stoppers for playing
and enjoying Atomix but it would be better if Atomix met the same high
standards for accessibility, usability and documentation as other Gnome
applications. Will
Il giorno gio, 12/01/2006 alle 12.13 +0100, Murray Cumming ha scritto:
So, does gedit have the dependency because it ships python bindings in
its tarball, but does not actually use those bindings itself? If so, why
not just put the gedit bindings in gnome-python-extras, along with the
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 13:10 +0100, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ nautilus-actions: there were some questions wrt to how it's
integrated in nautilus. Some people wanted it to be integrated in some
other way. No consensus, but maybe the
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 01:35 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
Let's see. If I'm not mistaken, the modules wrapping gnome desktop
libraries are:
- gnomeapplet
- gnomeprint, gnomeprint.ui
- gtksourceview
- wnck
- totem.plparser
- gtop
- nautilusburn
- mediaprofiles
On Thu, January 12, 2006 16:33, Mark Rosenstand wrote:
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 01:35 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
Let's see. If I'm not mistaken, the modules wrapping gnome desktop
libraries are:
- gnomeapplet
- gnomeprint, gnomeprint.ui
- gtksourceview
- wnck
-
On 1/11/06, Emmanuele Bassi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ gnome-power-manager: I don't remember much discussion. What do you
think? Is it well-tested?
Ubuntu has been shipping this for a while, first in Breezy then in
Dapper; it
Hi,
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 14:23 -0800, Corey Burger wrote:
On 1/11/06, Emmanuele Bassi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ gnome-power-manager: I don't remember much discussion. What do you
think? Is it well-tested?
Ubuntu has
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Guilherme de S. Pastore wrote:
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:28:32 -0200
From: Guilherme de S. Pastore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: Atomix [Re: Trying to reach consensus for the proposed
modules]
Em Qui, 2006-01-12 às 00:06 +
Hi all,
Here's an attempt to sum up the current state of what looks like
consensus about the proposed modules. It's an attempt, so I might be
wrong :-)
I'm not cross-posting, but input from translators and documentation
writers is of course welcome.
+ pyorbit: I think everyone is okay with
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ gnome-power-manager: I don't remember much discussion. What do you
think? Is it well-tested?
We ship this in Fedora Development and if I'm not mistaken so does SUSE
and Ubuntu in their respective development trees. It appears to work
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
snip
+ gnome-power-manager: I don't remember much discussion. What do you
think? Is it well-tested?
+ gnome-screensaver: people want this. I'd say we should go with it and
I believe it's the general consensus, but maybe some people
Hi,
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ gnome-power-manager: I don't remember much discussion. What do you
think? Is it well-tested?
Ubuntu has been shipping this for a while, first in Breezy then in
Dapper; it works great for me (it enabled me to suspend my laptop by
Vincent Untz wrote:
Hi all,
Hello,
+ deskbar-applet: most people were okay, some people thought it was
eating too much memory. I'd say consensus was accept, but there's the
issue that it depends on gnome-python-extras, which is not in the
bindings. What should be done here?
gedit 2.13.x
On 1/11/06, Steve Frécinaux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+ deskbar-applet: most people were okay, some people thought it was
eating too much memory. I'd say consensus was accept, but there's the
issue that it depends on gnome-python-extras, which is not in the
bindings. What should be
On Thu, January 12, 2006 11:00 am, Vincent Untz said:
+ atomix: I don't remember seeing much discussion for this one. What do
people think? Is Callum here? What do you think?
We need a way of getting good games like atomix into the main distribution
without them becoming yet another module.
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
Hi all,
Here's an attempt to sum up the current state of what looks like
consensus about the proposed modules. It's an attempt, so I might be
wrong :-)
+ gnome-power-manager: I don't remember much discussion. What do you
think? Is it
Elijah Newren wrote:
gedit 2.13.x also depends on g-p-e, for the new python plugins (like the
Snippets Plugin [1]).
It requires at least the gtksourceview module, and perhaps the
gnome-print bindings (I'm not sure).
The previous consensus and agreement was that desktop modules could
depend
Hi,
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 18:30 -0500, Pat Suwalski wrote:
Murray's email, it's not suitable for that set either. So we need to
determine what we want to do and reach consensus on this point as
well. A variety of options exist:
I'll bring a conservative point of view forward: binding
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 00:01 +0100, Steve Frécinaux wrote:
Elijah Newren wrote:
The previous consensus and agreement was that desktop modules could
depend upon python bindings found in the bindings release set.
gnome-python-extras isn't part of that set.
gedit's main widget is
Il giorno gio, 12/01/2006 alle 01.02 +0100, Murray Cumming ha scritto:
I don't understand how the python gtksourceview bindings are being used
by gedit. Is it used by the plugin system or by a plugin that is
supplied with gedit?
The inheritance goes
GtkTextBuffer - GtkSourceBuffer -
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Pat Suwalski wrote:
Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 18:30:17 -0500
From: Pat Suwalski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Desktop Devel desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: Trying to reach consensus for the proposed modules
Elijah Newren wrote:
gedit 2.13.x also depends on g-p-e
Pat Suwalski wrote:
Maybe it's time for a gedit-lite that bears much more resemblance to
Windows notepad than where gedit is going.
You must agree that Notepad is just a piece of crap.
As Paolo Borelli said, the new gedit is faster than the old one. It has
been partly rewritten and gained
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 15:45 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
- don't allow desktop modules to depend on gnome-python-extras,
unless they do so optionally (the state of things if we can't reach a
consensus or no one bothers to drive issue to try to get one)
This is not an option for python-based
* Jan 12 00:05 Steve Frécinaux [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Elijah Newren wrote:
The previous consensus and agreement was that desktop modules could
depend upon python bindings found in the bindings release set.
gnome-python-extras isn't part of that set.
gedit's main widget is gtksourceview, which
Hi Paolo,
On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 00:45 +0100, Paolo Borelli wrote:
[...]
The naive way to go at this would be splitting g-p-e in two (things that
could go in the desktop like pygtksourceview, pyapplet etc and things
that are not required for the desktop). However this distinction sounds
Steve Frécinaux wrote:
You must agree that Notepad is just a piece of crap.
Yes and no. For viewing things it would be perfectly okay if it could
handle foreign forms of line breaks. But I digress. The keyword is simple.
As Paolo Borelli said, the new gedit is faster than the old one. It
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 22:47 +, Bastien Nocera wrote:
+ gnome-screensaver: people want this. I'd say we should go with it
and
I believe it's the general consensus, but maybe some people think it's
not ready yet?
Drop-in replacement for xscreensaver, but with a decent UI. I'm in.
Le mercredi 11 janvier 2006 à 22:47 +, Bastien Nocera a écrit :
Salut Vincent,
On Wed, 2006-01-11 at 23:00 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ pyorbit: I think everyone is okay with this one
What is it used for? I guess that's to add to the bindings.
Your guess is correct :-)
Vincent
--
47 matches
Mail list logo
