Re: [evolution-patches] Ask user to make evolution default mail app bug #127526 (Mail)
- From: Not Zed <notzed ximian com>
- To: Niklas Nylund <ninylund abo fi>
- Cc: asdf <evolution-patches lists ximian com>
- Subject: Re: [evolution-patches] Ask user to make evolution default mail app bug #127526 (Mail)
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 10:52:52 +0800
On Mon, 2004-08-16 at 00:31 +0300, Niklas Nylund wrote:
This is a patch for bug 12752
(http://www.gnome.org/bounties/Mailer.html#127526).
The patch adds the features listed on the URL. As specified I added two
gconf keys on if the user wants evolution to check if it's the default
mail app at all and on key which specifies the default mail app.
You should probably use em_utils_prompt_user for the actual asking. Assuming it will do the key thing right (although it behaves a bit strangely). If it doesn't you should do something similar, using e_error to build the dialogue, rather than gtk_dialog directly. It should save you work, and make them visually consistent.
When Evolution is launched I first check the "prompt key" and if needed
the default mail app key. I don't know how useful this is if say the
user first selects Evolution as his/hers default app. and checks "Don't
ask this again". Later another application changes the default mail app.
key, then Evolution will not notify the user the next time it's started
(Since the prompt flag is still false). Should I add something which
fixes this to Tools->Settings or is this to be taken care of by
gconf-editor or some similar Gnome application?
One annoying thing exists though, the first time the user launches
Evolution both the wizard and the default mail app. dialog box appears,
since I added my function check_default_mail_app() to the end of
mail_component_init. But surely anyone with more experience from the
code knows a better place to put the check.
It should probably go in the shell somewhere in this version of evolution. Although this will have to target 2.2 anyway, since 2.0 is frozen; we might not have the wizard anymore in 2.2. So uh, i guess leave it in the mailer for now.
There's some minor formatting consistencies, and i'm_no_fan_of_sentences_for_function_names if they can be avoided.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]