Hello,
I have figured out I require 2.4.0 of libatk (by reading headers).
Who can give me libatk 2.4.0 prebuild for Windows (x86)?
Thanks
--
Kind Regards,
Robin Vossen
Please avoid sending me Word, Excel or PowerPoint attachments. See
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Hello,
I've tried everything I could but could not find any solution to this: I
use a GtkIMContext to pop up a button to active the on-screen-keyboard
via dbus (without any intention to actually do any IM communication).
However, if that GtkIMContext gets activated, it subsequently renders
the
hi;
once again, from the department of I didn't bother to ask, so I'll
make stuff up...
On 2 August 2012 13:52, Morten Welinder mort...@gnome.org wrote:
=== 4. Which GTK+ widgets break with touch ===
The SpinButton item from above is one example of those.
I really hope the solution is
hi;
and yet another case of I don't know that, so I'll make stuff up.
On 2 August 2012 14:11, Paul Davis p...@linuxaudiosystems.com wrote:
=== 3. SpinButton ===
[ ... ]
Another option is introducing a complete new widget targeted at touch
usage (similar to the one in iOS Garageband) [4]
hi;
On 4 August 2012 00:05, Michael Natterer mi...@gimp.org wrote:
On Thu, 2012-08-02 at 08:52 -0400, Morten Welinder wrote:
GtkSwitch bugs me. It really should just have been a styling of the toggle
button since it performs the same function with a different look. But no,
it is currently a
On Fri 03 Aug 2012 16:24, Pavel Holejsovsky pavel.holejsov...@gmail.com
writes:
I'd like to bring up the issue of how language bindings should cope with
this.
It is indeed pretty nasty, especially if you got used to a solution like
the java-gnome one.
One way to solve this would be to put
hi;
On 4 August 2012 14:14, Paul Davis p...@linuxaudiosystems.com wrote:
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 3:50 AM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
[ ... ]
and yet another case of i'm so nervous and irritated by criticism of our
design decisions that i'll resort to calling people stupid ...
hi;
On 3 August 2012 15:24, Pavel Holejsovsky pavel.holejsov...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/29/2012 12:09 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
I've put patches for deprecating the gdk threading api at
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=680754
Review appreciated.
I'd like to bring up the issue of
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 3:44 AM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
GtkSwitch bugs me. It really should just have been a styling of the toggle
button since it performs the same function with a different look.
it does not perform the same action.
That is a baseless assertion. Of course
hi;
On 4 August 2012 15:18, Morten Welinder mort...@gnome.org wrote:
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 3:44 AM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
GtkSwitch bugs me. It really should just have been a styling of the toggle
button since it performs the same function with a different look.
it does
On Sat, Aug 04, 2012 at 03:39:05PM +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
one implies a soft action (GtkToggleButton), whereas the other
implies something similar of a hardware switch (GtkSwitch).
As every user knows, widgets relay wishes to magic pixies. I wonder if
that is soft or hard action, maybe
=== 6. OSK widget context provider (e.g. search vs open vs go...) ===
Matthias said there was a patch floating around for that. I looked in the
bugs with patches attached in bugzilla but could not find it. If someone
knows where it is would be great.
hi John;
On 4 August 2012 21:43, John Lindgren john.lindg...@aol.com wrote:
About a month ago I sent a patch to the bug tracker to fix a problem
where GtkTreeView would emit signals, thereby executing user code,
during its destroy cycle. This is a potentially serious problem as the
state of
On 08/04/2012 04:58 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
hi John;
(snip)
I left a comment in bug 671939, but I can also repeat it here.
the patch in attachment 217892 looks okay - but what I'd like to see:
a) bisecting to see what commit broke this;
b) a test case for the TreeView test suite, to
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
the patch in attachment 217892 looks okay - but what I'd like to see:
a) bisecting to see what commit broke this;
b) a test case for the TreeView test suite, to ensure we don't regress again;
c) a patch done using git
Here are my thoughts about what we can achieve between now and 3.6:
- Fix animations (make spinners spin again): Benjamin is working on this
- Fix state propagation (the notorious grayed-out labels): Benjamin is
working on this
- Review and merge Owen's animation / paint clock work: Owen is going
On 08/04/2012 05:54 PM, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
the patch in attachment 217892 looks okay - but what I'd like to see:
a) bisecting to see what commit broke this;
b) a test case for the TreeView test suite, to ensure we
Toggle buttons and the switch widget both suffer usability problems for me.
The visual look of a button represents an action to be performed in my
mind, perhaps why it was referred to it as a soft-action? So when a button
is stateful it can create ambiguity depending on the text of the button.
The
Maybe not directly related, but will gtjk+ gain the animation capabilities
of Clutter (via merging with Clutter or layering on top of Clutter), such
that gtk+ widgets can behave like Clutter actors?
On Sat, Aug 4, 2012 at 3:13 PM, Matthias Clasen
matthias.cla...@gmail.comwrote:
Here are my
19 matches
Mail list logo
