On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Martin Dengler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 02:03:21PM +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Tomeu Vizoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 2:17 AM, Martin Dengler > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > + self.set_size_request(style.zoom(style.GRID_CELL_SIZE * 4), > -1) > > > > > > Sounds good to me, but I think Marco dislikes set_size_request. > > > > > > Marco, what do you think? > > > > I don't think we should set palette size to a fixed width. The whole > > gtk layout logic is dynamic, so that, for example, you can increase > > the font size without screwing up... > > There is indeed little point in having a nice auto-sizing GUI if code > is going to fix assumptions about sizes. > > In case you/anyone can think of something that might be acceptable, I > want to make the motivation clear: 1) many of the palettes in the > mockups at http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Designs/Frame seem to have a > fixed size; and 2) on IRC eben mentioned he liked the palettes a bit > wider (IIRC), and I, after trying it out on my XO, found the same.
To make my goal clear: I have no intention of requiring all of the device palettes to be a fixed width. For that matter, I don't care to specify an absolute size for any of them individually. I do, however, want to ensure that the sliders and meters and such within them have enough horizontal space to accurately portray the info they contain. I think that the battery meter should be about twice as wide as it is currently. As such, there must be a way to tell it to be *at least* some width, since below that width it's less readable. This is not a fixed assumption. The palette can naturally expand as necessary to allow room for longer text, etc. - Eben _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
