[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: adding desktop files to misc packages

Le jeudi 26 juillet 2007 à 11:38 +0200, Florent Rougon a écrit :
> Seems very clear to me: it has been almost a decade now since the GNOME
> project tries hard to get rid of every feature that makes their software
> more usable (I'm speaking here about real usability, not about
> eye-candy).

Eye candy... oh right, this must be why there are so many people
interested in bringing a compositing manager to metacity, rather than
improving performance or rendering quality.

> Witness:
>   - usable completion in the File Open dialog   -> gone

And back in GTK 2.10.

>   - customizable keyboard shortcuts in apps[1]  -> gone

This feature, despite its coolness, was more a source of annoyance by
setting shortcuts by mistake than anything else. Plus, as you wrote
later, it is hidden, not removed.

> And now, a usable menu listing available applications is going to be
> replaced by a "thing" where you have to find your casually-used app in a
> 300-entries unstructered list after clicking on "More applications..."
> (exactly as the "Open With..." in MS Windows works, no wonder where they
> got the idea).
> So, yes, there *is* a reason GNOME is going to switch to
> gnome-main-menu: the previous menu still had a little remainder of
> (real) usability.

The software you are talking about was rejected for inclusion in GNOME
2.18, and is not part of the GNOME 2.19 desktop.

>   [1] No, don't tell me that it is a simple matter of adding
>       "gtk-can-change-accels=1" to ~/.gtkrc-2.0. This simply *does*
>       *not* *work*. For instance, even with this, you have to go hunt
>       for the specific option in Gimp's Preferences menu before you can
>       at last add your own keyboard shortcuts. Ugh.

This is a problem in GIMP, not in GNOME.

: :' :      We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `'       We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
  `-        our own. Resistance is futile.

Reply to: