Hello Development List,
I'm wondering if you could help me customize the behavior of Gnome-Sushi.
I would like Sushi to not close whenever I preview the same sound twice in
a row. I noticed that the documentation lists:
Methods:
ShowFile(s: FileUri, i: ParentXid, b: CloseIfShown)
How can I set
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 3:23 PM, Mario Torre wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
>
>> 2. The user cannot install any other screenshot tool, unless they are
>> also using X11 only, given that there is no unified screenshot
>> interface for Wayland.
>
> This should be fi
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> 2. The user cannot install any other screenshot tool, unless they are
> also using X11 only, given that there is no unified screenshot
> interface for Wayland.
This should be fixed though with a proper interface added for all
environment
On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 07:50 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Allan Day wrote:
> > Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > ...
> > > > > I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anyth
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 7:16 AM, Allan Day wrote:
> Bastien Nocera wrote:
> ...
>
>> > > I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable.
>> > >
>> >
>> > On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anything that's
>> > not a flatpak would be part of the image, and therefore u
On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 12:16 +, Allan Day wrote:
> Bastien Nocera wrote:
> ...
> > > > I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable.
> > > >
> > >
> > > On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anything
> > that's
> > > not a flatpak would be part of the image, and the
Bastien Nocera wrote:
...
> > > I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable.
> > >
> >
> > On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anything that's
> > not a flatpak would be part of the image, and therefore unremovable?
> > I've been looking at this issue recently from
On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 11:23 +0100, Carlos Soriano wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:03 PM, Jeremy Bicha
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 4:45 PM, wrote:
> > > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Florian Müllner > org> wrote:
> > >> Why is that in the list? I would expect most users to use th
On Fri, 2017-11-03 at 19:03 -0500, mcatanz...@gnome.org wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Currently about half of the GNOME core apps are unremovable in GNOME
> Software. It's the set of apps that are not new additions to core
> over
> the past two years, but at this point that's entirely arbitrary. So
> we
> n
On Mon, 2017-11-06 at 10:51 +, Allan Day wrote:
> Matthias Clasen wrote:
> ...
> > I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable.
> >
>
> On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anything that's
> not a flatpak would be part of the image, and therefore unremovable?
>
On 2017-11-04 20:38, Florian Müllner wrote:
> In case of the calendar, the date headings should be insensitive if
> either no calendar application has been configured, or the configured
> app is not available. So there is a bug here, but it's that for some
> reason the code isn't working as expecte
On 6 November 2017 at 11:07, Bart Marien wrote:
> Guys, if i may just add the following:
>
> We use gnome extensively in a live e-learning context(+1000 installs).
> We've had some minor abuse of the screenshot feature where students would
> take screenshots of the teacher (video conference) and
Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
...
>
> This does not mean that gnome-screenshot should be made unremovable,
> but it definitely needs some additional thought.
>
Documentation is another factor to consider. Currently, if you look up how
to take a screenshot, the docs tell you to use the screenshot app [1]
Guys, if i may just add the following:
We use gnome extensively in a live e-learning context(+1000 installs).
We've had some minor abuse of the screenshot feature where students would
take screenshots of the teacher (video conference) and do all kinds of
stuff with it.
Currently we have the featur
On 6 November 2017 at 10:46, Florian Müllner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Carlos Soriano wrote:
>> I actually had no idea about the shortcuts until recently, specifically for
>> screenshoting an area, so I would be slightly against this. If we had the
>> shorcuts window in GNOME Shel
Matthias Clasen wrote:
...
> I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable.
>
On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anything that's not a
flatpak would be part of the image, and therefore unremovable? I've been
looking at this issue recently from a slightly different
On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 11:26 AM, Carlos Soriano wrote:
> I actually had no idea about the shortcuts until recently, specifically for
> screenshoting an area, so I would be slightly against this. If we had the
> shorcuts window in GNOME Shell and the initial setup would show it as it's
> planned th
I actually had no idea about the shortcuts until recently, specifically for
screenshoting an area, so I would be slightly against this. If we had the
shorcuts window in GNOME Shell and the initial setup would show it as it's
planned then I would probably be fine with the removal.
Best
--
Carlos S
On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 11:03 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 4:45 PM, wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Florian Müllner
> wrote:
> >> Why is that in the list? I would expect most users to use the various
> >> PrintScrn shortcuts for taking screenshots, which don't dep
19 matches
Mail list logo
