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

Bug#171417: openoffice.org: Please increase default recent files



On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 00:43, Chris Halls wrote:
> 
> > The default "recent files" is limited to 4 - I seem to go through this
> > number just reading my e-mail on a bad day.  I would like to see this
> > set larger by default.
> 
> I agree that it is a fairly small number, although I don't know whether 24
> is a good idea for people with small screens.

Sure.  I think possibly 9 would be a good number for general use,
although I would _like_ 24, for myself (proud owner of a 1600x1200
laptop :-)


> If you change the user .xml files, not the global ones, the changes will
> stick.  Did you try that?

Where would I do that?  How would I do that?

find . -type f | xargs grep PickListSize

doesn't appear to find anything.  It would be nice if there was a UI
twiddle to do this, but I guess that's an upstream issue.


> I guess that making the global .xml files modifiable means marking the
> complete tree as conffiles.  What do people think about that?  I'm a little
> wary because we might end up getting wierd behaviour between upstream
> version upgrades, and I don't know if we are ready to support that sort of
> thing yet.

Yes, probably that is a bit doubtful.


> > Here is a patch to increase the "recent files" to 24:
> 
> Well, I'm afraid marking the bug as 'patch' is cheating - your patch can't
> be applied to the source since these files are generated :(  Thanks, though,

:-)

Downloading the source package to find that out is, I'm afraid, just a
leeetle bit daunting!

Thanks,
					Andrew.
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew @ Catalyst .Net.NZ Ltd, PO Box 11-053, Manners St,  Wellington
WEB: http://catalyst.net.nz/         PHYS: Level 2, 150-154 Willis St
DDI: +64(4)916-7201     MOB: +64(21)635-694    OFFICE: +64(4)499-2267
           Survey for nothing with http://survey.net.nz/ 
---------------------------------------------------------------------




Reply to: