Le mercredi 29 février 2012 à 13:52 -0500, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit :
> Of course, it would be wonderful or terrible if we have global menus,
> but we don't. We have "Application Menus"... what's the difference?
>
> Application menus are explicitly set by the application, and aren't
> pulled out
> > OK, well then that proves that applications are able to decide
> > themselves what to do with new processes (open a new window, a new tab
> > or just present the existing window). That's one more reason why
> > gnome-shell should simply launch new processes each time an app icon is
> > pressed
> I know full well about LibUnique, considering that I'm the one who wrote it.
>
Eh eh ;)
> that is why I said "describe", and not "implement": a single instance
> application cannot tell the shell that its policy should be changed,
> because there is no way for the application to express this
> > That's not how it works on my PC: launching gnome-terminal twice
> > consecutively opens two terminals.
>
> Yes, there are two terminal windows, but what happens is that the new
> gnome-terminal process launches and tells the existing gnome-terminal
> process to open a new window.
>
OK, well
Le mercredi 08 février 2012 à 15:17 +, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit :
> hi;
>
> On 8 February 2012 15:10, Julien Olivier wrote:
>
> > Well, what I really mean is that gnome-shell should *try* to start a new
> > instance. If the application is single-window, it will wor
> > - Favorite apps should only be highlighted if they are running *on the
> > current workspace*.
> > - Clicking on the icon of a favorite app already running on another
> > workspace should launch a new instance of this app instead on
> > switching to the currently running one on the other work
Hi list,
after using gnome-shell for months now, I must say that I really love
the idea of using workspaces to isolate each task, and keep the number
of open windows to the minimum by only having windows related to each
workspace's task. However, something breaks this concept: the dash
always disp
> This is the only proposed way of using the shell that I can't really accept.
> I used to put Thunderbird and Banshee on the last/lowermost desktop and
> tried to ignore them. That lead to me first putting windows on the first
> four desktops to be able to park the named applications on the 5th on
> What is "Nautilus"? Our file manager has "Files" as the user-visible
> name in its .desktop file - that the executable / bugzilla component
> happens to be "nautilus" is an implementation detail.
> (Note that the strings for the notification actions are build
> from .desktop files, for the above
> - The alt-tab behaviour should be restricted to the current desktop by
> default.
> If the design goal was to have one 'task' per desktop (where a 'task' may
> consist of multiple applications), then surely alt-tab should not cycle over
> windows related to different tasks - one should change de
Le lundi 21 novembre 2011 à 20:16 -0500, Daniel Falk a écrit :
> When I click the nautilus icon on the dash when there's another
> nautilus running on another workspace, it switches to that other
> workspace. This is a useful behavior when this is what you intend to
> do.
>
>
> Unfortunately, it
> > As a result here is what I would love in gnome-shell:
> > [...]
> > * merge the menu bar into the title bar: we get pretty much the same
> > behaviour as unity for maximized windows, but something much more sane
> > for other windows.
>
> This has the potential of reducing the draggable titleb
Le vendredi 07 octobre 2011 à 10:19 +0200, Florian Müllner a écrit :
> On vie, 2011-10-07 at 01:02 -0700, Jeroen Verhoeckx wrote:
> > The design team of GNOME made some mock-ups for this:
> > http://live.gnome.org/Design/Whiteboards/Menus#Local_menu
>
> While some of the mockups on that page are d
Le vendredi 23 septembre 2011 à 14:22 +0200, Tomasz Sterna a écrit :
> Hi.
>
Hello Tomasz,
> As I understand workspaces are to be used to group windows related to
> single or similar task/s. (At least this is how I use them. :-)
>
> I have an issue that the application window grouping interfere
> Please do not suggest I change my work-flow...I find it making
> me want to scream that someone thinks they know how I should be
> work flowing.
>
The first time you used a computer, you just didn't have a work-flow,
and you built a work-flow by adapting to the user interface you had to
work wi
> Are you sure?
>
> I use Mod4 + t to launch a terminal, and that works fine in gnome-shell.
>
It doesn't work for me (using Ubuntu Oneiric).
___
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-she
Hi Philipp,
> But now to my suggestion:
> It would be great, if you could close windows via a middle click in the
> overview.
> If you now middle click on a window, it just opens the selected window.
> The simplified closing process would make the process of closing several
> windows easier.
What
> Evolution is and always-has-been modules hosted in a common shell; it is
> not monolithic. But you can't *deeply* separate mail, calendar, tasks,
> and memos without having to do a whole lot of extra plumbing [calendar
> view shows tasks and memos, mail messages can be turned into tasks, mail
> m
> Instead of special-casing selected applications, it may make sense to
> define a .desktop-file key that specifys: "I am a multi-mainwindow
> application".
>
Actually, I think that purely mono-window applications should prevent
the launch of a new window themselves. That's what transmission-gtk
> +1 This 'singleton' distinction is bogus.
>
> Gedit supports tabs, why was it proposed as a multi-window app?
>
I'd say the distinction is between applications which may or may not use
several windows (depending on the user's preference), and applications
which should NEVER have multiple win
> When you first press the icon the overview disappears and the focus
> returns to the terminal window, so you're proposing that to start a
> new terminal I go the overview, press terminal, go back to the
> overview, press terminal again. Apart from the repetitive nature of
> this when we already
On jeu., 2011-08-04 at 23:24 -0400, Jesse Hutton wrote:
> +1
>
>
> Not all apps are the same. Some are basically singletons (firefox,
> evolution, rhythmbox, etc), while others clearly are not and should
> default to multiple instances. The best examples I can think of have
> already been mention
>
> Case in point: assume an instance of terminal is already open and the
> user has forgotten about it. Also, assume that clicking the terminal
> icon always opens a new instance. Now when the user clicks the
> terminal icon and a new window pops up, she might see the old instance
> and go, "oop
>
> I would propose another idea: hidding the Dash itself. That is the
> easiest way to prevent showing the same application icon twice. Just
> like you said, if a user opens the application picker, that's because
> the application the user is looking for is not in the Dash.
>
>
> Sure, the pr
Le samedi 25 juin 2011 à 22:08 +0100, Maximilian Eberl a écrit :
> If one has it, one wants to get rid of it as soon as possible.
>
Unlike hemorrhoids, some of us actually do want to keep gnome-shell.
> It is like the Soviet Union: the inventors made something they thought is
> good for the pe
Le dimanche 05 juin 2011 à 01:37 -0400, Erick Pérez a écrit :
> I'll do it first thing in the morning.
>
Hi Erick,
could you please point me to your bug report? I can't find it in
bugzilla.gnome.org.
___
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list@
> But I still think that minimization should be kept because I'm
> 100% sure that at least some applications will never evolve
> the way we expect them to (split into a daemon and a UI), or
> it might take years.
>
> They certainly never will if minimization is aro
> Er, no. Your point was that it should be kept because it exists, and
> proper solutions don't.
>
> At least that was your point after you suggested cases in which it
> would be useful, and I suggested "perfect solutions" (those were your
> words) for them. Minimizing exists, those don't. Hence
> Minimization does not exist in gnome shell, at least not as part of
> the new workflow. It does exist as a vestigial trace of the old one, a
> sign of how things used to work, but it has no place in the way things
> work now, and I wouldn't be surprised if the ability to minimize
> totally disa
> No please, I *never* want to minimize apps, specially if they decide
> that in their smart way. IMO, changing the close button behaviour
> depending on the application will introduce an inconsistency as big as
> the whole galaxy, when I press the close button I *want* that window to
> be closed a
> Email applications and instant messengers should only be a way for you
> to interact with your online presence, that is, you should only need
> them running to send an email or an IM, but not to "listen" to
> incoming emails or IMs. Once you have set your accounts, Gnome should
> start listening
> I wouldn't "hurt", but it isn't a solution. There is ongoing
> conversation about the right solution to this [as has been mentioned
> here several times]. Just bringing back "minimize" isn't a solution.
> And you can still just leave them in a workspace. I always have
> Evolution, Empathy, XIR
> There are more reasons to want particular application to be
> running for some time without interfering with others, I gave
> just one.
>
> This could be a good time to tell us what those other reasons are.
Hi,
this has been said several times already but I'll say it a
Le dimanche 12 juin 2011 à 01:52 +0100, Artur Wroblewski a écrit :
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 1:26 AM, Andrew Pitonyak wrote:
> [...]
> > Assume that I have only two OpenOffice.org (OOo) documents open. I can use
> > Alt+Tab to quickly move to OOo, but, I don't see an easy way to jump into a
> > sp
> Something like this?
>
> https://launchpad.net/mailnag
Well, i haven't tried it yet, but does it use evolution to retrieve
emails or does it do so on its own? If it does it on its own, I guess it
means that you have to set up your accounts twice: once in evolution,
and once in the notifier? In
Hi,
> Everyone will hate you if you send poorly formatted, badly quoted mail
> around. But anyway, new mail notifications wouldn't be that bad for
> users of evolution.
>
New mail notification would be VERY useful especially now that there is
no way to minimize windows. But it will be useful on
Hi list,
in gnome-shell there is a cool feature that half-maximizes a window when
you stick it to the edge of the screen. Removing it from the edge then
gives it its original size back.
Now, there is a problem with this feature: there doesn't seem to be any
way for applications to know that they
Le vendredi 27 mai 2011 à 18:25 -0300, theblues gnr a écrit :
> Hi,
>
>
> I wanted to say that I really love GNOME 3, nice work all. :)
>
>
> One thing I'm missing is a way to get windows out of the way when I
> don't want to work with them. For instance, I keep Evolution running
> 100% of the
38 matches
Mail list logo
