|
Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
allows that*. I think we're better of doing that in branches until the
result is satisfying (git where are you?), if nobody has problems with
that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
Nick
* I do need to fix some issues in the gtkbuilder support in libxfce4ui
since gtk is not aware of the 4ui types (XfceTitledDialog), but there
is a quick code hack to fix that for the time being.
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
2009/7/10 Nick Schermer < nickschermer@...>:
> * I do need to fix some issues in the gtkbuilder support in libxfce4ui
> since gtk is not aware of the 4ui types (XfceTitledDialog), but there
> is a quick code hack to fix that for the time being.
Looking though the gtkbuilder code, this is an issue in gtk, so we
need the little hack for the titled dialog (calling
xfce_titled_dialog_get_type before parsing the gtkbuilder) until gtk
is fixed. Not a big deal if you'd ask me, filed a bug against gtk.
Nick
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
On 2009/07/09 23:30, Nick Schermer wrote:
> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
Yah, looks ok to me.
> we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
> purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
> allows that*.
Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. Does glade3 even export in GtkBuilder
format yet, without needing to use a conversion script?
It would be nice *not* to have to port the libglade stuff to 4ui to
avoid having that dependency (forever), though.
> (git where are you?)
Nowhere. I posted a list of things that needed to be done over 3 weeks
ago, and asked for help, but nobody stood up to do it. I haven't had time.
>, if nobody has problems with
> that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
Sure... hopefully porting from glade won't be *too* much work. I do
recall that there's a list of steps for "quick and easy" porting
somewhere, but I can't remember if I saw it on live.gnome.org or on some
blog on planet gnome or something. Sigh, I should bookmark things.
-b
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
2009/7/10 Brian J. Tarricone < brian@...>:
> On 2009/07/09 23:30, Nick Schermer wrote:
>>
>> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
>
> Yah, looks ok to me.
>
>> we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
>> purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
>> allows that*.
>
> Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. Does glade3 even export in GtkBuilder
> format yet, without needing to use a conversion script?
>
> It would be nice *not* to have to port the libglade stuff to 4ui to avoid
> having that dependency (forever), though.
Yes latest builds of glade work fine with gtkbuilder (probably even
better with gtkbuilder then with libglade).
> Nowhere. I posted a list of things that needed to be done over 3 weeks ago,
> and asked for help, but nobody stood up to do it. I haven't had time.
I'm not an expert in those kind of things, so I'll just focus on the
code. I don't want to put pressure on anyone, just saying this is the
kind of stuff we're agreed to switch git ;-).
> Sure... hopefully porting from glade won't be *too* much work. I do recall
> that there's a list of steps for "quick and easy" porting somewhere, but I
> can't remember if I saw it on live.gnome.org or on some blog on planet gnome
> or something. Sigh, I should bookmark things.
No worries, already ported and wrote stuff in gtkbuilder, know now it works ;-).
Nick
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
Maybe another worthy addition could be an implementation for
xselection checking for single instance applications. I think we use
this here and there...
gboolean
xfce_acquire_selection (const gchar *name, gboolean force,
GDestroyNotify callback_function, gpointer user_data, GError **error);
name: name of the selection.
force: force to get the selection.
callback_function: triggered when someone else took the selection, use
to quit this instance.
user_data: pointer for the GDestroyNotify callback.
error: Reason why false was returned (selection error or because the
selection was already acquired).
return value: %TRUE if selection was succesfully set, %FALSE if the
selection was already acquired or failed.
Duno about the GError parameter...
Nick
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
2009/7/11 Nick Schermer < nickschermer@...>:
> Maybe another worthy addition could be an implementation for
> xselection checking for single instance applications. I think we use
> this here and there...
How about hard-depending on libunique?
Mike
> gboolean
> xfce_acquire_selection (const gchar *name, gboolean force,
> GDestroyNotify callback_function, gpointer user_data, GError **error);
>
> name: name of the selection.
> force: force to get the selection.
> callback_function: triggered when someone else took the selection, use
> to quit this instance.
> user_data: pointer for the GDestroyNotify callback.
> error: Reason why false was returned (selection error or because the
> selection was already acquired).
> return value: %TRUE if selection was succesfully set, %FALSE if the
> selection was already acquired or failed.
>
> Duno about the GError parameter...
>
> Nick
> _______________________________________________
> Xfce4-dev mailing list
> Xfce4-dev@...
> http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev>
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
2009/7/11 Mike Massonnet < mmassonnet@...>:
> 2009/7/11 Nick Schermer < nickschermer@...>:
>> Maybe another worthy addition could be an implementation for
>> xselection checking for single instance applications. I think we use
>> this here and there...
>
> How about hard-depending on libunique?
Could be, but that's another project that will be in gtk eventually...
It is an possibility tho.
Nick
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
2009/7/11 Nick Schermer < nickschermer@...>:
> 2009/7/11 Mike Massonnet < mmassonnet@...>:
>> 2009/7/11 Nick Schermer < nickschermer@...>:
>>> Maybe another worthy addition could be an implementation for
>>> xselection checking for single instance applications. I think we use
>>> this here and there...
>>
>> How about hard-depending on libunique?
>
> Could be, but that's another project that will be in gtk eventually...
> It is an possibility tho.
Dummy me, this doesn't allow to send client message to e.g. panel
plugins however.
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
2009/7/10 Nick Schermer < nickschermer@...>:
> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
> we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
> purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
> allows that*. I think we're better of doing that in branches until the
> result is satisfying (git where are you?), if nobody has problems with
> that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
Done. Can someone test the migration-to-4ui branch of xfce4-settings?
If it works fine then it can be merged back to trunk.
Nick
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
On 2009/07/11 05:44, Mike Massonnet wrote:
> 2009/7/11 Nick Schermer< nickschermer@...>:
>> Maybe another worthy addition could be an implementation for
>> xselection checking for single instance applications. I think we use
>> this here and there...
>
> How about hard-depending on libunique?
Yes, I'd prefer this too.
And gdk already has functions for sending client messages (there's
actually a special client message variant of gdk_event_send()).
We can always drop the libunique dep when gtk has similar functionality.
(Note that I'd advocate the apps depending on libunique, not making
libxfce4ui depend on it.)
Although, really, the current code for this in the apps seems to work
just fine, so there's no need to replace it. Could just leave it alone
until gtk's libunique-ish stuff lands. New apps that require this
functionality can either copy/paste, or just use libunique.
-brian
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
On 2009/07/11 09:43, Nick Schermer wrote:
> 2009/7/10 Nick Schermer< nickschermer@...>:
>> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
>> we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
>> purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
>> allows that*. I think we're better of doing that in branches until the
>> result is satisfying (git where are you?), if nobody has problems with
>> that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
>
> Done. Can someone test the migration-to-4ui branch of xfce4-settings?
> If it works fine then it can be merged back to trunk.
Wow, that was fast. I'll try to give it a look (I'm on OS X now, but
want to reboot into Linux to test the new ALSA driver that just got
written for my laptop) this weekend if I have time.
-brian
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
2009/7/11 Brian J. Tarricone < brian@...>:
> On 2009/07/11 09:43, Nick Schermer wrote:
>>
>> 2009/7/10 Nick Schermer< nickschermer@...>:
>>>
>>> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
>>> we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
>>> purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
>>> allows that*. I think we're better of doing that in branches until the
>>> result is satisfying (git where are you?), if nobody has problems with
>>> that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
>>
>> Done. Can someone test the migration-to-4ui branch of xfce4-settings?
>> If it works fine then it can be merged back to trunk.
>
> Wow, that was fast. I'll try to give it a look (I'm on OS X now, but want
> to reboot into Linux to test the new ALSA driver that just got written for
> my laptop) this weekend if I have time.
Esp. take a look at the sm handling in xfce4-settings-helper, you know
better me how it is supposed to work.
Nick
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
On 2009/07/11 12:15, Nick Schermer wrote:
> 2009/7/11 Brian J. Tarricone< brian@...>:
>> On 2009/07/11 09:43, Nick Schermer wrote:
>>> 2009/7/10 Nick Schermer< nickschermer@...>:
>>>> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
>>>> we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
>>>> purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
>>>> allows that*. I think we're better of doing that in branches until the
>>>> result is satisfying (git where are you?), if nobody has problems with
>>>> that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
>>> Done. Can someone test the migration-to-4ui branch of xfce4-settings?
>>> If it works fine then it can be merged back to trunk.
>> Wow, that was fast. I'll try to give it a look (I'm on OS X now, but want
>> to reboot into Linux to test the new ALSA driver that just got written for
>> my laptop) this weekend if I have time.
>
> Esp. take a look at the sm handling in xfce4-settings-helper, you know
> better me how it is supposed to work.
Heh... I wish. I'm actually still not convinced it works as intended.
But maybe you fixed it by accident ^_~.
-b
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 12:04:40 -0700
"Brian J. Tarricone" < brian@...> wrote:
> On 2009/07/11 09:43, Nick Schermer wrote:
> > 2009/7/10 Nick Schermer< nickschermer@...>:
> >> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the
> >> api, we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I
> >> also like to purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum
> >> gtk dep (2.14) allows that*. I think we're better of doing that in
> >> branches until the result is satisfying (git where are you?), if
> >> nobody has problems with that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
> >
> > Done. Can someone test the migration-to-4ui branch of
> > xfce4-settings? If it works fine then it can be merged back to
> > trunk.
>
> Wow, that was fast. I'll try to give it a look (I'm on OS X now, but
> want to reboot into Linux to test the new ALSA driver that just got
> written for my laptop) this weekend if I have time.
Yeah, damn, you're too fast for me! ;)
Gonna give the GIO appfinder a spin later, same for the
4ui branch of xfce4-settings.
- Jannis
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
On 07/11/2009 12:15 PM, Nick Schermer wrote:
> 2009/7/11 Brian J. Tarricone< brian@...>:
>> On 2009/07/11 09:43, Nick Schermer wrote:
>>> 2009/7/10 Nick Schermer< nickschermer@...>:
>>>> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
>>>> we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
>>>> purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
>>>> allows that*. I think we're better of doing that in branches until the
>>>> result is satisfying (git where are you?), if nobody has problems with
>>>> that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
>>> Done. Can someone test the migration-to-4ui branch of xfce4-settings?
>>> If it works fine then it can be merged back to trunk.
Looks pretty good. Everything seems to work ok, tho I didn't test
extensively.
> Esp. take a look at the sm handling in xfce4-settings-helper, you know
> better me how it is supposed to work.
It looks all right... at least it should do the same thing it did
before... not saying that it was right before :-P
-brian
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
|
Re: Libxfce4ui api review, round 2
2009/7/13 Brian J. Tarricone < brian@...>:
> On 07/11/2009 12:15 PM, Nick Schermer wrote:
>>
>> 2009/7/11 Brian J. Tarricone< brian@...>:
>>>
>>> On 2009/07/11 09:43, Nick Schermer wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 2009/7/10 Nick Schermer< nickschermer@...>:
>>>>>
>>>>> Well for as long a nobody has complaints at this stage about the api,
>>>>> we can start to port the core components to libxfce4ui. I also like to
>>>>> purpose the switch to Gtkbuilder since the minimum gtk dep (2.14)
>>>>> allows that*. I think we're better of doing that in branches until the
>>>>> result is satisfying (git where are you?), if nobody has problems with
>>>>> that I'll pick this up during the weekend.
>>>>
>>>> Done. Can someone test the migration-to-4ui branch of xfce4-settings?
>>>> If it works fine then it can be merged back to trunk.
>
> Looks pretty good. Everything seems to work ok, tho I didn't test
> extensively.
Ok then I'll merge it back to trunk this evening. Thanks for testing.
Nick
_______________________________________________
Xfce4-dev mailing list
Xfce4-dev@...
http://foo-projects.org/mailman/listinfo/xfce4-dev
|
signature.asc (204 bytes) 