On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 10:37 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My
> feeling is that metacity will be hard to upstream patches to, and it
> would be more work to get working 'right', since it's pretty much
> designed *not* to be extensible.
I tend to think metacity upstream might t
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Walter Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> of an issue than resolving incompatibilities between libraries (The
> Gimp pulls in all sorts of stuff and Inkscape tries to pull in
> incompatible libraries, such as an old version of poppler),
No longer the case.
> inco
Erik introduced the Journal/datastore to this thread about modifying
the approach Sugar has taken to WM in order to better support legacy
applications, The Gimp being everyone's favorite example. I am simply
suggesting that the WM is--while not the least of our problems--less
of an issue than resol
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 04:16:17PM -0400, Walter Bender wrote:
> We all agree that the datastore needs serious attention, although it
> doesn't directly impact the running of legacy activities. Rainbow is
> an issue. And moving data back and forth between Sugar and legacy apps
> is an issue. But I'
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 04:16:17PM -0400, Walter Bender wrote:
>We all agree that the datastore needs serious attention, although it
>doesn't directly impact the running of legacy activities. Rainbow is
>an issue. And moving data back and forth between Sugar and legacy apps
>is an issue.
Please s
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:17 AM, Erik Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well. It's off-topic.
>
> I guess it came to mind because the Journal and datastore are a point of
> incompatibility between Sugar and the rest of the Linux desktop world.
>
> Erik
>
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 08:16:25AM -0
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Erik Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, it is also my impression. I have heard similarly
> from virtually all technically-oriented parties involved. I have heard
> echos of this from less technical users (e.g. teachers who are confused
>
Well. It's off-topic.
I guess it came to mind because the Journal and datastore are a point of
incompatibility between Sugar and the rest of the Linux desktop world.
Erik
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 08:16:25AM -0400, Walter Bender wrote:
> Could you please elaborate on what the behavior of the Jour
Well. It's off-topic.
I guess it came to mind because the Journal and datastore are a point of
incompatibility between Sugar and the rest of the Linux desktop world.
Erik
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 08:16:25AM -0400, Walter Bender wrote:
> Could you please elaborate on what the behavior of the Jour
Could you please elaborate on what the behavior of the Journal has to
do with this thread?
-walter
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Erik Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 05:01:41PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
>> My impression, based on historical conversations with th
IMO, there is no technical reason why we can't support every X
application, no matter how baroque. Window manager technology is as
old as X. Given that we can, we *should*.
--scott
--
( http://cscott.net/ )
___
Devel mailing list
Devel@lists.laptop.
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 05:01:41PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> My impression, based on historical conversations with the parties
> involved is that there are a bunch of hackers who feel that we did
> ourselves a disservice by dropping _so much_ backwards compatibility,
> specifically with Unix fi
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Mikus Grinbergs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The principal goal of this discussion is to make the X Activity
unnecessary by moving that functionality into Sugar's window management.
>
>> what percentage of "legacy" applications are multiwindow? If it is a sm
My impression, based on historical conversations with the parties
involved is that there are a bunch of hackers who feel that we did
ourselves a disservice by dropping _so much_ backwards compatibility,
specifically with Unix filesystems and desktops, in exchange for
cool ideas. The feeling is that
>>> The principal goal of this discussion is to make the X Activity
>>> unnecessary by moving that functionality into Sugar's window management.
> what percentage of "legacy" applications are multiwindow? If it is a small
> percentage, then maybe we shouldn't be so focused on their support at
> th
Please have a look at
http://www.gimpshop.com/
which corrals the gimp windows to have a more wm friendly face.
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 9:37 AM, Walter Bender <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> The X Activity is pretty straight forward. But it does not integrate
> the Sugar copy/paste/theming etc. The
The X Activity is pretty straight forward. But it does not integrate
the Sugar copy/paste/theming etc. The point of my question was not so
much to question those goals as much as to ask if we have data re what
percentage of "legacy" applications are multiwindow? If it is a small
percentage, then ma
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Walter Bender wrote:
| (I run SKYPE in Bert's X Activity
| without a problem.)
The principle goal of this discussion is to make the X Activity
unnecessary by moving that functionality into Sugar's window management.
Possible motivations for this inclu
I am curious: do we have a taxonomy of the various applications we are
expecting to see. Has there been a characterization of the problem we
are trying to solve? The Gimp, which is a mess in any wm, seems to be
the only example of a lots of floating little windows application
anyone ever mentions.
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 1:26 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Scratch that, I lied... I hope the freedesktop spec is flexible enough
>> to implement our kind of UI feedback.
>
> I read the spec, it seemed sane. Proof will be in the implementation,
> though, of course.
Yeah... Re
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 7:16 PM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 1:10 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> And, of course, I
>>> wanted to switch sugar to using the standard X activity startup
>>> notification mechanism, and the standa
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 1:16 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 1:10 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> And, of course, I
>>> wanted to switch sugar to using the standard X activity startup
>>> notification mechanism, and the standa
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 1:10 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And, of course, I
>> wanted to switch sugar to using the standard X activity startup
>> notification mechanism, and the standard desktop notification
>> mechanism.
>
> I'm not sure this is necessary. All the activi
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 10:37 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The main changes required, I think, would actually be to the shell
> code to make it happy running on a root window. There's some
> reparenting magic that's done to make that work right;
I'm not sure what you mean exa
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 4:59 PM, Mikus Grinbergs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lots of discussion -- but I'm not sure how much benefit the Sugar
> *user* might receive.
Some users will want to use gimp. Some will want to use metacity.
> To me, supporting "multiple windows for one Activity" is a m
Lots of discussion -- but I'm not sure how much benefit the Sugar
*user* might receive.
I think that everybody agrees (myself included) that the user must
be able to call up the Frame anytime. And for typical Activities,
the amount of screen real estate they *themselves* obstruct (which
the F
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 4:50 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Metacity was provided just as an example. The issue here is that we
> want to replace Matchbox with something which would let us support
> normal desktop applications better, ideally without requiring any kind
> of mod
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 1:26 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 9:43 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, if there's only one window, and it's "stretchable", then your
>> decision is easy.
>> If it requests a fixed size, then you should
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 1:13 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I
>>> suppose we could add a new hint for some activities indicating which
>>> of their multiple windows (if any) should be the 'back
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 12:56 AM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Marco and I have been discussing on how to make a window manager like
>> Metacity fit into the Sugar environment, and based on our curren
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 3:56 PM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 9:43 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Well, if there's only one window, and it's "stretchable", then your
>> decision is easy.
>> If it requests a fixed size, then you should
On Sat, Sep 20, 2008 at 12:49 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> | I just thought of a worst problem with the FULLSCREEN approach.
>> | FULLSCREEN windows are always on the top of NORMAL windows
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 9:43 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, if there's only one window, and it's "stretchable", then your
> decision is easy.
> If it requests a fixed size, then you should probably decorate and
> float all the windows. I could also see floating all fixed s
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I
>> suppose we could add a new hint for some activities indicating which
>> of their multiple windows (if any) should be the 'background' one
>> mapped full-screen, but I believe the existing hints are adequate.
>
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 3:33 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> We are talking about replacing Matchbox with Metacity in the XO build of
> Sugar.
Right, I think that's where you're going wrong. You should be
considering replac
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 9:26 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think you are confusing the role of the Window Manager. When I run
> sugar under metacity, I don't *want* my activities to be full screen.
> When I use a windowing wm, I expect them to be in (decorated) windows.
Yeah
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
We are talking about replacing Matchbox with Metacity in the XO build of
Sugar.
C. Scott Ananian wrote:
| When I run
| sugar under metacity, I don't *want* my activities to be full screen.
I think you mean "When I run Sugar inside a standard desktop
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 4:07 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marco and I have been discussing on how to make a window manager like
> Metacity fit into the Sugar environment, and based on our current
> discussions, as well as past discussions, it seems clear that we need
> change
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 8:28 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | I just thought of a worst problem with the FULLSCREEN approach.
> | FULLSCREEN windows are always on the top of NORMAL windows.
>
> Why is this a problem? When do we need an Activity to be visible,
> full-screen,
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Bobby Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Are we set on moving to metacity? I remember murmurs of using xmonad,
>> as well as another wm I can't remember the name of. Are these
>>
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 8:30 PM, Bobby Powers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are we set on moving to metacity? I remember murmurs of using xmonad,
> as well as another wm I can't remember the name of. Are these
> stacking/hinting problems common to all window mangers, or just
> metacity?
They are
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:00 PM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Let's keep thinking about this. For example, I wonder what Metacity does
>> to a window that is both _NET_WM_STATE_FULLSCREEN a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
| On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|> Let's keep thinking about this. For example, I wonder what Metacity does
|> to a window that is both _NET_WM_STATE_FULLSCREEN and
|>
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's keep thinking about this. For example, I wonder what Metacity does
> to a window that is both _NET_WM_STATE_FULLSCREEN and
> _NET_WM_STATE_BELOW? Does it stack it below the Frame, if the Frame is
> _NET_WM_
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 12:13 AM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> | On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
> | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |> In summary, I believe we can safely move
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
| On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|> In summary, I believe we can safely move to a lightly patched Metacity
|> while tagging our windows purely according to the EWMH.
|
| T
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In summary, I believe we can safely move to a lightly patched Metacity
> while tagging our windows purely according to the EWMH.
That would mean to make Sugar impossible to use on a standard distribution.
Marco
__
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
|> However, though we do not always show frames (or panels), there are
|> some environments which show at least a single panel all the time (eg:
|> Ubuntu Netbook Remix). In those cases, fullscreen might mean that
|> frame
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:02 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some of our activities have a separate fullscreen mode. Take a look at
> the two screenshots of record:
>
> Fullscreen:
> http://dev.laptop.org/~sayamindu/sugar_metacity/Captura%20de%20pantalla_1.png
> Normal:
> htt
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 2:12 AM, Benjamin M. Schwartz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sayamindu Dasgupta wrote:
>>
>> The simplest way to do this is mentioned in the draft, namely, to have
>> a new _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE hint, called _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE_NETBOOK_APP
>> (feel free to suggest a better name
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Benjamin M. Schwartz wrote:
| ... _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE_FULLSCREEN ...
That should be _NET_WM_STATE_FULLSCREEN.
Oops,
Ben
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iE
Sayamindu Dasgupta wrote:
> The simplest way to do this is mentioned in the draft, namely, to have
> a new _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE hint, called _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE_NETBOOK_APP
> (feel free to suggest a better name :-P).
I do not understand at all why _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE_FULLSCREEN is
insufficient.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 10:07 PM, Sayamindu Dasgupta
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>a) applications like firefox will need to be modified so that they set
>the _NET_WM_WINDOW_TYPE_APPLICATION hint (ideally we would like to run
>the applications unmodified).
The idea would be that applications would j
53 matches
Mail list logo
