I wouldn't think we purposely want to have nested popovers. That just seems odd to me.
Best Regards, Daniel Foré www.elementaryos.org On Jan 10, 2012, at 2:21 PM, Christian Dywan <[email protected]> wrote: > Am 10.01.2012 20:38, schrieb Cassidy James: >> Better contractor integration: we have a stub of methods for that, but we >> may need some widgets, some docs, etc... > For what I want, widgets can always be added. So I wouldn't rush in > half-baked code. They could start to be written just after release. >> PopOvers debugging: I think there is not a lot of bugs for the popovers, >> excepted the bug of double PopOvers (if you try to put a popover in a >> popover, it behaves oddly). API checks are needed here too. And >> non-compositing detection (to fallback to a basic >> dialog). > Is nested popover expected to be a valid use case or do you mean it should > issue a warning? >> Introduce a Granite.Init function? It might be needed in the future, so, >> having it now may be better. It could be used to detect the compositing for >> instance, or whatever. > If you ask me, do implicit initialization. That's what WebKit does. That's > what GIO does (remember the threading API thread). And Gtk.Application though > not a mere function, implicitly initializes GTK+. >> License changes: do we want to switch to a LGPL base? > That point feels like a déjà-vu, though I may be confusing something. I have > a vague memory of this being the decided plan already. > -- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~elementary-dev-community > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~elementary-dev-community > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~elementary-dev-community Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~elementary-dev-community More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
