Re: Mysterious option

[Darko Obradovic <dobradovic gmx de>]

Am 19.02.2004 18:59 schrieb(en) Peter Bloomfield:
> On 02/19/2004 12:26:57 PM, Darko Obradovic wrote:
> [ snip ]
>> Second: It doesn't work with gedit anyways, as it's tab-based
>> and not bound to one process per file. That's what irritated me
>> when testing this feature. And gedit will be the standard
>> editor for most people.
> 
> It actually seems to work pretty well with gedit (tho tabs do
> seem to be an issue).  If you want to make a lot of repetitive  
> changes, surely an external editor is the sensible way to do it--the  
> editing features of GtkTextView will never replace one.

Having no gedit open yet and opening no new tabs before closing the  
tempfile, it should work, yes, but in any other case, it shouldn't, as  
it isn't process-bound per file. Can't test it anymore, as I have a  
balsa-version with this patch applied now, but you could check these  
two quickly.
If I'm right, the feature could be quite confusing or even damaging for  
people closing their edited file and seeing nothing at all happen. The  
edited text would be lost unless you go searching it in the tmp- 
directory. I might be wrong though.

>> So, I'd suggest to remove this feature.
> 
> I'd argue against that.  It works, it doesn't get in the way of  
> anything else, and it provides a capability you can't get any other  
> way.

why would copy&paste not work?

> I don't recall ever using it except to test it out, so I can't say  
> I'd miss it myself.  There was a thread a while ago about using  
> Bonobo to simply replace the GtkTextView with a widget (component?)  
> chosen by the user--perhaps that would be a smoother solution.  But I  
> believe there is a problem, and the current feature provides one  
> solution.

That's where we get into the very controverse discussion gnome2 has had  
when deciding to strip most preferences and configurability. I like it  
very much, but I understand that there are certainly other opinions. :)

Darko Obradovic