On September 30, 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
On September 29, 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Keep in mind that the
binary is started on demand, so it does not take any memory if you are
not using it (assuming it would automatically stop itself after a
while).
Sebastian Kügler wrote:
Regarding implementing it as a separate applet: I don't think it would
have been a good idea because you would have to either add a dumb icon
to your panel so that you could run this system, or add an invisible
applet (not handy for the user to manipulate).
That's
Sebastian Kügler wrote:
On Monday 28 September 2009 17:01:34 Roderick B. Greening wrote:
I wonder if it would be worthwhile for Sebastian and Aurelien to get
together and chat offline. I see some opportunity for clarification in a
one-on-one via irc, etc.
Not sure, it sounds like you
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 10:34:19 Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Sebastian Kügler wrote:
Regarding implementing it as a separate applet: I don't think it would
have been a good idea because you would have to either add a dumb icon
to your panel so that you could run this system, or add an
Hey Aurélien,
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 10:52:55 Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Sebastian Kügler wrote:
On Monday 28 September 2009 17:01:34 Roderick B. Greening wrote:
I wonder if it would be worthwhile for Sebastian and Aurelien to get
together and chat offline. I see some opportunity for
On September 29, 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Keep in mind that the
binary is started on demand, so it does not take any memory if you are
not using it (assuming it would automatically stop itself after a
while).
Same goes for applets, dataengines...
Can an applet unload itself from
Sebastian Kügler wrote:
On Thursday 24 September 2009 09:16:25 Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
On September 23, 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo a écrit :
On September 23, 2009, Marco Martin wrote:
every other consideration aside, i feel that it would have been -far-
On Monday 28 September 2009 15:03:05 Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Sebastian Kügler wrote:
On Thursday 24 September 2009 09:16:25 Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
On September 23, 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo a écrit :
On September 23, 2009, Marco Martin wrote:
I wonder if it would be worthwhile for Sebastian and Aurelien to get together
and chat offline. I see some opportunity for clarification in a one-on-one via
irc, etc.
I believe we had some great discussions at UDS and Sebastian was awesome at
helping provide guidance to Aurelien at the time.
On Monday 28 September 2009 17:01:34 Roderick B. Greening wrote:
I wonder if it would be worthwhile for Sebastian and Aurelien to get
together and chat offline. I see some opportunity for clarification in a
one-on-one via irc, etc.
Not sure, it sounds like you see personal issues between
On Monday 28 September 2009 17:01:34 Roderick B. Greening wrote:
I wonder if it would be worthwhile for Sebastian and Aurelien to get
together and chat offline. I see some opportunity for clarification in
a one-on-one via irc, etc.
Not sure, it sounds like you see personal issues
On Thursday 24 September 2009 09:16:25 Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
On September 23, 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo a écrit :
On September 23, 2009, Marco Martin wrote:
every other consideration aside, i feel that it would have been -far-
easier to mantain
Hi,
I for one was one of the early skeptics, being a supporter of keeping Kubuntu
as much a pure KDE dist as possible.
Part of our goal was to allow Canonical to trial their new notifications under
KDE, while defaulting to pure KDE notifications, thus permitting the user the
choice to test
Am Mittwoch 23 September 2009 16:48:00 schrieb Aurélien Gâteau:
Hi,
I would like to present to you some work I have been doing for Canonical
regarding notifications in Plasma.
That just saved you from a rant about it on planetkde from my side ;-) I
wanted to blog about some things I don't
Martin Gräßlin wrote:
An important point: While the patch is integrated in Kubuntu, the
default behavior is to use KDE notifications. The user can switch to
Ayatana notifications through an option of the system tray configuration
dialog (there are even preview buttons to help the user
Disclaimer: this mail is not meant to sound offensive and/or personal.
On Wednesday 23 September 2009 16:48:00 Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Hi,
I would like to present to you some work I have been doing for Canonical
regarding notifications in Plasma.
Before going further, let me state that my
Am Mittwoch 23 September 2009 18:21:32 schrieb Aurélien Gâteau:
Martin Gräßlin wrote:
An important point: While the patch is integrated in Kubuntu, the
default behavior is to use KDE notifications. The user can switch to
Ayatana notifications through an option of the system tray
Martin Gräßlin wrote:
Why should a user switch to something else than the KDE notifications?
The dialog is completely missing any information on what the
notifications provide, what's the difference between the two and in the
end it will come down to the one provides different possible
Am Mittwoch 23 September 2009 18:50:41 schrieb Aurélien Gâteau:
Martin Gräßlin wrote:
Why should a user switch to something else than the KDE notifications?
The dialog is completely missing any information on what the
notifications provide, what's the difference between the two and in the
On September 23, 2009, Dario Freddi wrote:
presented as your initiative regardless of Ayatana. However, with Ayatana
notifications user interaction is not possible, hence your previous patch
was either an unfortunate wrong timing coincidence or strictly related.
of course it is strictly
Dario Freddi wrote:
I'd like a bit more clarity. The patch you posted about powerdevil was
presented as your initiative regardless of Ayatana. However, with Ayatana
notifications user interaction is not possible, hence your previous patch was
either an unfortunate wrong timing coincidence
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Aaron J. Seigo ase...@kde.org wrote:
On September 23, 2009, Dario Freddi wrote:
presented as your initiative regardless of Ayatana. However, with Ayatana
notifications user interaction is not possible, hence your previous patch
was either an unfortunate wrong
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
On September 23, 2009, Dario Freddi wrote:
presented as your initiative regardless of Ayatana. However, with Ayatana
notifications user interaction is not possible, hence your previous patch
was either an unfortunate wrong timing coincidence or strictly related.
of
On Wednesday 23 September 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Hi,
I would like to present to you some work I have been doing for Canonical
regarding notifications in Plasma.
Before going further, let me state that my goal with this mail is not to
get this work incorporated upstream, as I
On September 23, 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
before this gets carried forward into a big thread on this list, it has
been made very clear that Canonical is intent on following through on
these ideas as they are. it is an insular project without outside
On September 23, 2009, Marco Martin wrote:
every other consideration aside, i feel that it would have been -far-
easier to mantain if the systray patch just consisted in notifications
disabling and provide a totally separate daemon for that kind of
notifications
unless i'm misremembering
Aaron J. Seigo a écrit :
On September 23, 2009, Marco Martin wrote:
every other consideration aside, i feel that it would have been -far-
easier to mantain if the systray patch just consisted in notifications
disabling and provide a totally separate daemon for that kind of
notifications
On September 23, 2009, Aurélien Gâteau wrote:
Aaron J. Seigo a écrit :
On September 23, 2009, Marco Martin wrote:
every other consideration aside, i feel that it would have been -far-
easier to mantain if the systray patch just consisted in notifications
disabling and provide a totally
28 matches
Mail list logo
