Re: [Galeon-devel] Re: [Nautilus-list] Nautilus-Mozilla proposal
- From: Alex Larsson <alexl redhat com>
- To: Ricardo Fernández Pascual <ric users sourceforge net>
- Cc: galeon-devel lists sourceforge net, nautilus-list <nautilus-list lists eazel com>
- Subject: Re: [Galeon-devel] Re: [Nautilus-list] Nautilus-Mozilla proposal
- Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 19:02:15 -0500 (EST)
On 6 Apr 2002, Ricardo Fernández Pascual wrote:
> El sáb, 06-04-2002 a las 21:15, Alex Larsson escribió:
>
> > * People claim the galeon view is good (I didn't get it to work)
>
> What's the problem? It should be as easy to build and run as any other
> NautliusView for gnome 1...
>
> I'm interested because I'm the supposed maintainer of it.
I just used the latest (rawhide) packages of nautilus (1.0.6-12), mozilla
(0.9.9-6) and galeon (1.2.0-5). Whenever i try to use the view it just
says:
** ERROR **: This process has not registered the required OafIID your
source code should register 'OAFIID:GNOME_Galeon_NautilusViewFactory'. If
your code is performing delayed registration and this message is trapped
in error, see oaf_idle_reg_check_set.
aborting...
** WARNING **: nautilus(21799): A view failed. The UI will handle this
with a dialog but this should be debugged.
> > CONS:
> > -----
> > * Another dependency added. In order to get a sane user experience we
> > would probably have to make the nautilus packages require galeon.
> > (Although it would not be needed when compiling nautilus.)
> > In fact, this seems to be a bad circular dependency, since galeon would
> > BuildRequire nautilus and nautilus would (runtime)Require galeon. It may
> > be solvable though.
>
> Currently, you are requiring Mozilla and another package (the mozilla
> view) to achieve the same thing. Using galeon instead of the current
> mozilla view is just replacing one package with another, because galeon
> has not any dependency that nautilus doesn't have already (besides
> mozilla)
Yes. But the nautilus-mozilla package is a really small one, and we're
gonna require mozilla anyway (since galeon requires it). I don't
personally care, but i know we're gonna get screams about "bloat".
> > * We lose control of the web-browsing parts of Nautilus. This means that
> > parts of the UI is defined outside of nautilus, and may evolve in ways
> > we don't agree with.
>
> galeon-devel is always open to discussions about usability and
> consistency. Galeon aimed since the first moment to be as consistent as
> possible with the rest of gnome. For example, it didn't create an
> inconsitent custom zoom control ;-)
Heh. Yeah. Nautilus is not the best example of an app that looks like the
rest of the Gnome desktop, but Nautilus 2 does somewhat better.
> Being a galeon developer, I know that keeping up to date with mozilla is
> quite a bit of work. Duplicating that work in gnome is pointless, IMHO.
I very much agree.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Alexander Larsson Red Hat, Inc
alexl redhat com alla lysator liu se
He's an impetuous coffee-fuelled card sharp looking for 'the Big One.' She's a
vivacious gold-digging safe cracker who dreams of becoming Elvis. They fight
crime!
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]