Phistuck did correct me, I did mean the extensions framework.  I just
want core features complete, and a release to the stable branch for
2.x, I think at this point the idea is to grow market share.  So I
agree if simple patches can extend functionality without introducing a
slew of new bugs, why not.


On Feb 22, 2:31 pm, Dremation <[email protected]> wrote:
> The plugin framework might be complete, but it's far from perfect. The
> throbber could be adjusted to be just a simple gif located in the root
> folder that the user can change at his/her will.
>
> On Feb 22, 2:08 pm, PhistucK <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Yeah, sure, bug fixes should be the main concern right now, definitely
> > (and a few missing core features).
> > But if someone does not know how to do that or simply not into that right
> > now and is more into these stuff, I am sure a patch can help (I would if I
> > knew..).
> > And the plugin framework is already complete. You must mean the extensions
> > framework.
>
> > ☆PhistucK
>
> > On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 19:53, Jarrett Wold <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I would agree on this, it seems like an awful lot of feature requests
> > > that really don't impact much.  The only thing I really want to see at
> > > this point are bug fixes and of course a plugin framework.
>
> > > On Feb 20, 6:46 pm, Dremation <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >  > Isn't the idea of Chrome to provide a lightweight yet powerful
> > > > browsing experience? So if we load it up with nice visual effects not
> > > > only are we consuming more resources to provide the visual effects but
> > > > it also means less time spent on the core functionality of the
> > > > browser. I think the Devs need to spend more time on the core of the
> > > > engine rather then the visually appealing effects.
>
> > > > On Feb 19, 9:59 am, PhistucK <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Right, but when it is visible, it can be a more stylish throbber.
> > > > > ☆PhistucK
>
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 17:48, Meok <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > Chrome doesn't treat the throbber in the conventional manner, in 
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > there is no inactive state. In other words, it's not always visible
> > > > > > and only appears while a tab is loading. They would have to pin a
> > > > > > throbber on the far right of the toolbar like Netscape.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Discussion mailing list: [email protected] 
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe: 
    http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-discuss
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to