Mike Hearn wrote:
On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 20:16 +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
I'd love to get my digital camera syncing on Linux (Mustek). It uses a
shell extension. Good enough reason for you? :-)
Is a shell extension really the only way you can access the camera?
That's pretty poor UI desig
On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 20:16 +0200, Shachar Shemesh wrote:
> I'd love to get my digital camera syncing on Linux (Mustek). It uses a
> shell extension. Good enough reason for you? :-)
Is a shell extension really the only way you can access the camera?
That's pretty poor UI design if so (imho :).
Wh
Mike Hearn wrote:
Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Though, if we would want to support shell extensions, I don't see how
we could effectively do it without having it do everything the native
explorer does
That would be the other reason. But, I think it makes more sense to
try and bridge shell extensi
Shachar Shemesh wrote:
Though, if we would want to support shell extensions, I don't see how we
could effectively do it without having it do everything the native
explorer does
That would be the other reason. But, I think it makes more sense to try
and bridge shell extensions to Nautilus/Kon
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Calling it Explorer would imply that it's supposed to do everything
Windows explorer does, which seems a bit dubious to me. It'd be like
calling the wineserver the winekernel.
No, I don't see why it implies that it has to do everything the
Windows one does, but it has
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
No, I don't see why it implies that it has to do everything the
Windows one does,
Depends on whose perspective you're looking at if from. From a developer
perspective, you are able to easily distinguish what invisible Explorer
functions need to be replicated and which do
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If by explorer you mean things like the taskbar then yes, maybe once
> the winedesktop works gets in (I wonder what happened to that) we'll
> need some kind of task switcher/shell program. I don't think we need
> an entire file browser - there is winefile b
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
We will sooner or later need an Explorer clone, if only for desktop
mode, and it seems to me it is exactly the right place for the systray
code.
If by explorer you mean things like the taskbar then yes, maybe once the
winedesktop works gets in (I wonder what happened to t
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> No, I think that'd be misleading. It doesn't explore stuff and never
> will, and it may also do other things in future that Explorer
> doesn't. It's a rough analogue of Explorer in the same way that the
> wineserver is a bit like the Windows kernel.
We wil
Steven Edwards wrote:
Maybe we should just go ahead and call it explorer in case you plan on adding
stuff later on or
adapting parts of ReactOS explorer.
No, I think that'd be misleading. It doesn't explore stuff and never
will, and it may also do other things in future that Explorer doesn't.
It
Hi,
--- Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - Add a wineshell process to stand in for Explorer
> - Rewrite system tray code to be standards compliant
Maybe we should just go ahead and call it explorer in case you plan on adding
stuff later on or
adapting parts of ReactOS explorer.
Thanks
St
11 matches
Mail list logo
