Re: connected-servers / bookmarks mess

[Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>]

On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 11:28 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 13:37 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> 
> > So, what about this then (mostly similar to your proposal, with some
> > name tweaks and general ui additions):
> > 
> > We use bookmark as the main user settable entity, adding custom icons to
> > the bookmark store.
> > 
> > Then we add a checkmark in the bookmark dialog that says "Treat bookmark
> > as volume". Enabling this means the bookmark works as a "sever
> > bookmark", i.e. it hides any containing mounts (except in computer:),
> > and it gets an unmount/eject operation (if the containing mount exists).
> > It can also be availible on the desktop. Its still positioned in the
> > bookmarks part of the sidebar/panel menu, allowing manual positioning,
> > etc.
> 
> Do you think we should generate GVolume objects for bookmarks treated as
> volumes? I think we might still want that... not sure.

I don't think we want to do that really. Its nicer if we mainly handle
them as bookmarks (allowing reordering, putting them with the other
bookmarks, etc). Otherwise, why do them as bookmarks after all?

If we create a GVolume all we get is more complexities filtering that
out.

However, we could make GBookmarkMonitor automatically shadow mounts (if
there is a GVolumeMonitor singleton around) using g_mount_shadow as
described in http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=555332#c5