Re: patch and questions

[Stefano Teso <stefano teso gmail com>]

Hi Cosimo,

On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:27 AM, Cosimo Cecchi <cosimoc gnome org> wrote:
> Hi Stefano!
>
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 10:51:11 +0100, Stefano Teso wrote:
>
>> - Considering the better theme-ability of GtkIconView (as exposed by
>> some themes, e.g., Clearlooks Revamp), I was wondering whether it
>> would be useful to port nautilus from it's own (eel-based) custom
>> thing to GtkIconView. The idea would be to subclass GtkIconView to
>> implement filename editing, etc. Using a GtkListView (for the list
>> view, as it already is) and a GtkIconView (for the icon/compact views)
>> would perhaps allow for the same data model to be used in both cases
>> and simpler code. (Just a guess, I don't really have much experience
>> with GTK.) Is there any deep technical reason why nautilus doesn't use
>> the stock GtkIconView widget, or just lack of resources? Am I missing
>> something obvious?
>
> Having a GtkIconView-based NautilusIconView is indeed a good and worthwhile
> goal, which would also allow nautilus to drop some thousand lines of quite
> complex code, which is always nice...

That's what I thought.

> I think the most important feature now missing from GtkIconView is manual
> layouting of items in the canvas [1], which is currently allowed in every
> Nautilus' icon view (and would still be a requirement for the desktop icons,
> even if we removed the feature for regular windows). I don't know whether
> that's desirable for GtkIconView to allow that though, but maybe it'd be
> possible to use a custom GtkCellArea implementation, which I haven't
> investigated yet.

Thanks for the clarification. I don't think manual icon layouting is a
very used feature -- except for desktop icons, and that will still be
required in GNOME 3 fallback mode --, but this is beyond the point. I
will try to understand if I can make something out of this idea, but
unfortunately my spare time is very limited, so don't expect patches
soon ;-)

Cheers,

----
Stefano

>
> [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=528127
>
> Thanks,
>
> Cosimo
>