On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 23:35 +0100, Christian Neumair wrote:
> The original motivation was that I hoped to be able to easily fix the
> problems reported by Martin where icons randomly jumped around
> (reproducible when pressing ctrl-R).
I think this is just hysteresis due to this:
1. you turn off "keep aligned"
2. you move an icon to a position that is not snapped; the
metadata gets saved to your exact position
3. you turn on "keep aligned" - the icon snaps
4. you reload - the icon goes back to where you had placed it
It *may* be that the metadata is not getting updated after (3), but I'm
not sure.
I'm claiming that it is hysteresis, and not the snapping code, because
just today I was debugging some problems with volume icons on totally
new home directories (i.e. with no previous metadata), and I ran into
the "hitting C-r moves my icons" bug.
> I'm not sure what the best further steps are, we could
> a) rework some of the grid logic to maybe have a more fine-grained grid.
> Sounds reasonable. IIRC, Sebastien Bacher also requested that the drop
> grid (i.e. the tight one) matches the normal wise grid used in this
> case.
The placement grid is buggy. It doesn't take into account
DESKTOP_PAD_{HORIZONTAL,VERTICAL}. (And how are those different from
container->details->left_margin, etc? This is so convoluted...)
> b) replace the NAUTILUS_IS_DESKTOP_ICON_FILE check in
> fm_icon_view_add_file with has_volume || has_drive.
See the patch I just sent to the list. You could think that the bug is
the test for NAUTILUS_IS_DESKTOP_ICON_FILE(), but I think we just had an
evil bug of mine in finish_adding_new_icons().
> c) revert the last patch which removed the usage of a tight layout for
> semi positioned icons. Worst option IMHO.
I think that patch was correct; it needs to be consistent with the way
the desktop is created, which is with a non-tight layout.
> Also note that icon_set_position could need some love, it doesn't really
> clip the icon into the visible area, because it doesn't subtract the
> borders.
Let's reduce the number places where the coordinates get frobbed. The
right behavior for icon_set_position(), I think, is to *not* touch the
coordinates it gets passed. The calling code should have figured out
the correct and final coordinates already.
--
nautilus-list mailing list
nautilus-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/nautilus-list
