Re: gnome-multi-term

Michael Meeks <michael ximian com> writes: 
> >  - write a GtkTreeView with keybinding names in left column, 
> >    gtk_accelerator in right column, and double-click to 
> >    change the accelerator (i.e. a "keybinding editor widget")
> 	Of course, it would be really nice to write this once for the
> BonoboUIHandler, and serialize the result as an XML <keybinding>
> section, but ...

They aren't menu accelerators, they're things like Alt+1 to switch

I think keybindings are nicest in gconf as:

 keybindings/tab_out_of_terminal   "<Ctrl>Tab"
 keybindings/switch_to_tab_1       "<Alt>1"

rather than:

 keybindings/all_keybindings       "<big-ass XML string>"

etc. - since this is sane in gconf-editor.

I plan to have a global toggle that makes Alt+f for file menu, Ctrl+v
to paste, etc. pass to GTK vs. go to the terminal. I don't have any
better ideas for handling those. However I'm not sure how I'm going 
to implement making them pass to GTK... it may involve some rather
questionable hacks.

> 	Also - we need a decision on this issue - if we go with your
> terminal - which seems ok as a scheme, I'd like to see it in
> gnome-core under eclectic maintainership, and get Gediminas working
> with you instead of against you.

I hope there's no working against going on. I don't consider trying
multiple approaches at once to be a bad thing or against anyone. I
would encourage anyone to fix gnome-terminal. And I would encourage
people who start full rewrites not to commit the initial broken state
into CVS as the default implementation.

If "eclectic maintainership" means "we have no idea who maintains this
thing" I would prefer to avoid it - I would like to review all
profterm changes because I understand that code as a whole.  I don't
want people to just commit stuff. 

Maybe I should put that more strongly - if I have to agree to random
people changing the terminal in arbitrary ways I think I'd like to
leave current gnome-terminal to that treatment and keep the terminal I
use in working order, thanks. ;-) So please keep that in mind at the
release team meeting.

> 	If you work on gnome-x-font-selector.[ch] can you make it clear where
> the authoritative code is, it's bad enough having uncertainty and people
> working on different terminals, without lots of copies of partially
> ported X font selectors ;-)

Sure, I'll have a look.

> 	Ultimately it seems we need some sort of decision on this issue, and
> then a lot of hacking to get 1 good terminal out of the options.

The release team is going to sort this out today as I understand it.

If we go profterm then it will be renamed to gnome-terminal. I tend to
agree with the "no need to copy it into gnome-core" viewpoint but this
is a detail.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]