On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 22:02, Gary C Martin<g...@garycmartin.com> wrote: > On 11 Aug 2009, at 18:25, Eben Eliason wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Lucian >> Branescu<lucian.brane...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> 2009/8/11 Simon Schampijer <si...@schampijer.de>: >>>> On 08/11/2009 12:14 PM, Lucian Branescu wrote: >>>>> >>>>> In fact, there is the option to install the SSB activity as well, >>>>> http://dl.getdropbox.com/u/317039/create%20ssb.png >>>> >>>> Yes seen that. >>>> >>>>> rgs on IRC suggested that the 'Keep in Journal' button could either >>>>> save an offline version by itself or there could be a drop down >>>>> with >>>>> several options. >>>> >>>> Do you mean the activity keep button? Like the one in Write - >>>> where we have >>>> the options to save a richt text format or others? If yes - yeah >>>> that sounds >>>> like a good option actually. >>> >>> I'll go ahead and try to implement that, then. >>> >>>> >>>>> About modifying SSBs, right now all the tools for modification are >>>>> inside the actul activity. I'd like to see modification of >>>>> userscripts >>>>> and userstyles done in 'View Source' (as well). >>>> >>>> Oh, yeah view source. Sounds interesting to me, too. We just need >>>> to make >>>> sure to not overload it. I mean editing text is easy. When it >>>> comes to >>>> changing the icon it gets more complicated, though. >>> >>> Perhaps the Sugar shell should allow users to change activity icons? >> >> It's an unfortunate fact that there is no activity suitable for >> creating SVG icons for Sugar. We need a "Draw" activity to fill this >> gap and compliment Paint... >> >>> In any case, View Source already has Document view and Bundle view. >>> We >>> could either expand Document view to have a TreeView on the left like >>> Bundle view or create a separate Editables view. >> >> I hesitate to overload the view source mechanism this way, actually. >> Should we instead be providing a seamless mechanism for modifying >> code, icons, etc. with other activities, so that users (eventually) >> have choices regarding their editors? View source is a logical step in >> the process, so we should certainly expose the ability to launch into >> editing from there, of course. I suppose an alternative argument can >> be made for the level of integration we could provide when editing >> within the view source dialog. If we could hook it up to have >> "real-time" effect on the running activity, so that making a change >> couldbe tested right away, that may make it worth doing... > > If "View Source" makes it to "Edit Source", it could be reasonable to > expect that if you do modify and then close the source editor you > would raise an Activity like alert bar with something like "Activity > needs to re-start for changes to take effect (Discard changes) (Re- > start activity)". I understand that Guido van Rossum had some > proposals for Sugar to pick up live Python edit changes, but I guess > that's water long under the bridge now given current Sugar Labs > resources.
Didn't looked as something so ground breaking, I would say it's just waiting for someone to spend a weekend and come up with a prototype. Regards, Tomeu > Regards, > --Gary > > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel