Lindsay Holmwood wrote: >>Maybe not for version one, but I think that it would be really interesting to >>allow extensions to define "virtual files" and "virtual directories", in >>addition to adding menu items and such. >> >>Use cases that I can see would be allowing programs like "Beagle" to provide >>virtual folders as a plubin, which would contain running [saved] queries, or >>to >>allow navigation within a tarball, or maybe some sort of "directory unifier" >>plugin, to allow displaying all document directories across the computer as >>one directory, and many other interesting uses. >> >>Of course, this is just an idea that I think would be cool to have. > > That's quite a neat idea. I could see that type of filesystem > abstraction being rather helpful for sysadmins who want to dumb down or > even restrict the filesystem heirarchy to users. > > It'd also be pretty rad if you could view all the changes you make > throughout your home dir, grouped in directories by date. Would work a > treat if you were a heavy desktop icons/folder user. > > The fact that there'll be language bindings will make it a cinch to > implement too. Something to hack on if I have spare time. :-)
The extension framework is not meant to solve these issues. For this kind of "extensibility" we'd need to either (a) export a lot of internals of the file manager or (b) extend the VFS layer. While my original plan was to do (a), I've came to the conclusion, that this is not a really good idea, and (b) would do better here (together with a flexible metadata framework). But (b) requires a *LOT* of work. > Lindsay Benedikt _______________________________________________ Thunar-dev mailing list Thunar-dev@xfce.org http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/thunar-dev
