Re: My (ongoing) analysis of the proposed modules

[Ole Laursen <olau hardworking dk>]

Paolo Maggi <paolo maggi polito it> writes:

> > If we can find a way to hide the more complex stuff by default (even
> > if gedit-plugins is installed) then that's a plus. Something like
> > Emacs's modes seems like a possible way.
> > 
> 
> I discussed this with snorp some time ago. We think it should be
> possible to add a command line parameter to disable syntax highlighting
> and all the plugins. 
> In this way we could have a gnome-text-editor script that calls gedit
> with the --I-want-a-simple-text-editor parameter.
> 
> What do you think?

I'm exclusively using Emacs, but I think that dividing it in that way
would be silly. For instance, isn't syntax highlighting one of those
goodies that can be implemented without complicating the user
interface?

I personally think your list

>    + Document statistics
>    + User name
>    + Indent lines 
>    + Tag list
>    + Insert Date/Time
>    + Shell output
>    + Spell checker
>    + Sort

seems to be pretty sensible and straightforward except for tag list
and shell output.

I think the problem is a heterogenous environment where some users
need more features than others. Then perhaps it would be a good idea
if gedit was always restricted to the list above (even with the
plugins package installed), until you flipped a "I'm so advanced that
I live from the bits sent to /dev/null" switch, at which point all
plugins would be usable.


And I think you're right that the preferences window perhaps need
trimming, although it is quite beautiful.

-- 
Ole Laursen
http://www.cs.auc.dk/~olau/