On Wed, 2011-07-06 at 15:10 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> Sorry I didn't follow up on this, but I've abandoned the HTTP approach
> in favor of an NPAPI plugin.
>
> I'm doing a bit of a writeup of it soon. The amount of information
> spread between GitHub/Wiki/ML is a bit too much for me to cle
Sorry I didn't follow up on this, but I've abandoned the HTTP approach
in favor of an NPAPI plugin.
I'm doing a bit of a writeup of it soon. The amount of information
spread between GitHub/Wiki/ML is a bit too much for me to clean up,
and I'm trying to get to a point where I have a canonical place
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 15:39 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
>
> > 2. Multiple users or sessions on the same machine
> > Only the first session can use it.
>
> My idea was that log-out would stop the HTTP daemon for that session
> and open one for the current user. Unless there's a special case
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:19:07 -0400, "Jasper St. Pierre"
wrote:
> You're free to disable it, go into
> ~/.local/share/gnome-shell/extensions and delete the directory to tidy
> it up.
>
> Maybe this even a bit more simplistic, but I'm planning on removing
> the "Install" label, only exposing an "E
On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:09 PM, Holger Berndt wrote:
> Hello Jasper,
>
> I really like your proposals. Great work! Just a comment:
>
> On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 21:01:36 -0400, "Jasper St. Pierre"
> wrote:
>
>> * Users need to be able to click one button, and like magic the
>> extension instantly is
Hello Jasper,
I really like your proposals. Great work! Just a comment:
On Tue, 21 Jun 2011 21:01:36 -0400, "Jasper St. Pierre"
wrote:
> * Users need to be able to click one button, and like magic the
> extension instantly is downloaded, unzipped, loaded and enabled.
> * Users need to be abl
> Q: What happens when I'm offline and want to disable/enable extensions?
> A: Well, for those cases, I'll probably have an extremely bare-boned
> UI that allows people to disable/enable extensions.
In this case you should use gnome-tweak-tool - it already exists.
I will add live extension enabl
OK. This has caused quite the controversy here. I do not really want
to hurt or upset anybody, and I understand a lot of your concerns
about security and safety.
By now I've believe I've made my case on why I would like to pursue an
in-browser approach. I'm just going to take one last chance to go
Le jeudi 23 juin 2011 à 22:00 +1200, John Stowers a écrit :
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:48 +0200, ecyrbe wrote:
> > thank you john for the bits of history of the design.
> > i do know about server programming, as in fact it's my job to make
> > high load servers in c++.
> > i also understand the des
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Elia Cogodi wrote:
> I'd have said that a local setting shouldn't be catered for by an
> online-only GUI and that while online website seamless integration is
> nice, you should also have an equivalent local tool for the operations
> that make sense locally, such
I'd have said that a local setting shouldn't be catered for by an
online-only GUI and that while online website seamless integration is
nice, you should also have an equivalent local tool for the operations
that make sense locally, such as enable/disable.
A native GUI speaking DBus sounds like the
2011/6/23 Jasper St. Pierre
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:59 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> > there are of course other possible designs... just let me enounce one :
> >
> > - the shell maintains a long polling connection directly with
> > extensions.gnome.org and tells him directly under the user account wh
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:59 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> there are of course other possible designs... just let me enounce one :
>
> - the shell maintains a long polling connection directly with
> extensions.gnome.org and tells him directly under the user account what are
> the extensions enabled/installe
At this point to put my foot down on the thread and say:
* The official first release will use some form of local HTTP server.
* If you want to make a third-party extension for better browser
integration, go for it! I'd be more than happy to modify the
browser-side client JS[0] to make it easi
there are of course other possible designs... just let me enounce one :
- the shell maintains a long polling connection directly with
extensions.gnome.org and tells him directly under the user account what are
the extensions enabled/installed/disabled/errors in the shell.
- when the user connects
>> As you do not have stuff like ActiveX, you need something to retrieve
>> the info. Having something with local storage means it has to already be
>> known by the browser. So you'll have to change the local storage of all
>> possible browsers...
>
> There are very good reasons why this type of th
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:28:12AM -0400, Jesse Hutton wrote:
> > As you do not have stuff like ActiveX, you need something to retrieve
> > the info. Having something with local storage means it has to already be
> > known by the browser. So you'll have to change the local storage of all
> > possib
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:00:31AM -0400, Jesse Hutton wrote:
> > Forgive me if this has also been considered, but what about using offline
> > storage support in HTML 5? In browsers, it looks like this is implemented
> > with an SQLite datab
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 08:00:31AM -0400, Jesse Hutton wrote:
> Forgive me if this has also been considered, but what about using offline
> storage support in HTML 5? In browsers, it looks like this is implemented
> with an SQLite database, which theoretically the Shell could talk to as
> well.
>
thanks, i'll do it this week end and upload the patch on the same bugzilla
for comparison (if libsoup works of course)
2011/6/23 Jasper St. Pierre
> Right now, see the patches in bug 653212[0]
>
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 7:54 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> > is there a place where this server lives so i c
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 4:35 AM, Jasper St. Pierre
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:59 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> > sorry i only replied to you, not the list and with a lot of misspelling,
> a
> > corrected answer :
> >
> > 2011/6/23 Jasper St. Pierre
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:14 AM, ecyr
Right now, see the patches in bug 653212[0]
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 7:54 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> is there a place where this server lives so i can take a look to implement
> the same behaviour in the shell?
> thanks
>
> 2011/6/23 John Stowers
>>
>>
>> > It wouldn't be
>> > running co
is there a place where this server lives so i can take a look to implement
the same behaviour in the shell?
thanks
2011/6/23 John Stowers
>
>
> > It wouldn't be
> > running code when sleeping -- it would just be waiting on
> > select()...
> >
> > don't use select... it's
> It wouldn't be
> running code when sleeping -- it would just be waiting on
> select()...
>
> don't use select... it's not portable... use libevent for this job if
> you want.
>
This discussion is academic now.
The server is about 50 lines of python (with portability
2011/6/23 Jasper St. Pierre
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:21 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> > 2011/6/23 John Stowers
> >>
> >> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:48 +0200, ecyrbe wrote:
> >> > thank you john for the bits of history of the design.
> >> > i do know about server programming, as in fact it's my job to ma
Il giorno gio, 23/06/2011 alle 06.26 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre ha
scritto:
> >> The only browser-agnostic way to do this is
> >> to basically be a website.. that means running a simple HTTP
> daemon.
> >
> > The following might be really stupid and newbie questions, but I am
> > worried by having an
> How would the extension site launch the HTTP server? (Well, with
> systemd, we can use socket activation, but that's up to the Fedora
> guys)
>
>
I read something in this list about using a browser extension. But now that
I think about it, browser extensions are most likely not allowed to trigger
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:21 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> 2011/6/23 John Stowers
>>
>> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:48 +0200, ecyrbe wrote:
>> > thank you john for the bits of history of the design.
>> > i do know about server programming, as in fact it's my job to make
>> > high load servers in c++.
>> > i a
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Rovanion Luckey
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm not sure if I'm absolutely out of line; But couldn't the local web
> server be not running at all until launched either by the user visiting the
> extension site or that it's time to look for updates?
How would the extension
Hello,
I'm not sure if I'm absolutely out of line; But couldn't the local web
server be not running at all until launched either by the user visiting the
extension site or that it's time to look for updates?
--
www.twitter.com/Rovanion
___
gnome-shell-
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 5:42 AM, Alessandro Crismani
wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Il giorno gio, 23/06/2011 alle 04.35 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre ha
> scritto:
>> The only browser-agnostic way to do this is
>> to basically be a website.. that means running a simple HTTP daemon.
>
> The following might be
2011/6/23 John Stowers
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:48 +0200, ecyrbe wrote:
> > thank you john for the bits of history of the design.
> > i do know about server programming, as in fact it's my job to make
> > high load servers in c++.
> > i also understand the design better and the solution you try
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 10:42 +0100, Alessandro Crismani wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Il giorno gio, 23/06/2011 alle 04.35 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre ha
> scritto:
> > The only browser-agnostic way to do this is
> > to basically be a website.. that means running a simple HTTP daemon.
>
> The following mig
On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 11:48 +0200, ecyrbe wrote:
> thank you john for the bits of history of the design.
> i do know about server programming, as in fact it's my job to make
> high load servers in c++.
> i also understand the design better and the solution you try to
> provide.
>
> as i said. you
thank you john for the bits of history of the design.
i do know about server programming, as in fact it's my job to make high load
servers in c++.
i also understand the design better and the solution you try to provide.
as i said. you can make the server lightweight inside the shell, i don't
think
Hi James,
Il giorno gio, 23/06/2011 alle 04.35 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre ha
scritto:
> The only browser-agnostic way to do this is
> to basically be a website.. that means running a simple HTTP daemon.
The following might be really stupid and newbie questions, but I am
worried by having an unwant
>
>
>
> ok, so you need a json http service to make thing easier, i will not
> try to disturb you from this design as a lighweight way of doing it is
> possible.
> Can you try to make it a glib-gio asynchronous server embedded inside
> the shell in javascript?
> this would make
2011/6/23 Jasper St. Pierre
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:59 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> > sorry i only replied to you, not the list and with a lot of misspelling,
> a
> > corrected answer :
> >
> > 2011/6/23 Jasper St. Pierre
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:14 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> >> > sorry, but i
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:59 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> sorry i only replied to you, not the list and with a lot of misspelling, a
> corrected answer :
>
> 2011/6/23 Jasper St. Pierre
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:14 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
>> > sorry, but i think that i miunderstood you or the contrary i
sorry i only replied to you, not the list and with a lot of misspelling, a
corrected answer :
2011/6/23 Jasper St. Pierre
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:14 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> > sorry, but i think that i miunderstood you or the contrary i don't konow
> > (sorry english is not my native langage).
>
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 3:14 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> sorry, but i think that i miunderstood you or the contrary i don't konow
> (sorry english is not my native langage).
> but i understood that you need an http daemon just to keep the state of
> installed extensions in the browser in sync with the she
sorry, but i think that i miunderstood you or the contrary i don't konow
(sorry english is not my native langage).
but i understood that you need an http daemon just to keep the state of
installed extensions in the browser in sync with the shell.
doesn't a cokie based system should theoycally worj?
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 2:29 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> Hi jasper... are you really sure you want to have an http daemon just for
> updating an extension?
> why can't you have :
> - a cron task for polling update check
> - get the shell write to a cookie write the currently installed extensions
> - use a
Hi jasper... are you really sure you want to have an http daemon just for
updating an extension?
why can't you have :
- a cron task for polling update check
- get the shell write to a cookie write the currently installed extensions
- use a javascript code for analysing the cookie information and sh
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 06:13:54PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> For instance, what would happen if JS tried to read from the URL at
> "aim://AOL System Message"?
I am going to shut up now :P
--
Regards,
Olav
___
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 05:27:53PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
>> mime types, URL handlers, and thousands of other clever hacks don't
>> allow two-way communication. I want to have a button that says
>> "Enable" or "Disable" based on the c
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 05:27:53PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> mime types, URL handlers, and thousands of other clever hacks don't
> allow two-way communication. I want to have a button that says
> "Enable" or "Disable" based on the current state of the Shell. None of
> those hacks let me do
The problem isn't getting data from the browser to the Shell, it's
getting data from the Shell to the browser.
mime types, URL handlers, and thousands of other clever hacks don't
allow two-way communication. I want to have a button that says
"Enable" or "Disable" based on the current state of the
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 03:39:19PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 07:12:53PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
>> >> As I played around with it, I found the H
Random thoughts:
1. MIME type still seems nicer
2. Would it be possible to have a custom URL handler?
--
Regards,
Olav
___
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 03:39:19PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 07:12:53PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> >> As I played around with it, I found the HTTP approach more feasible
> >> and less ugly than the mime
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:27 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 07:12:53PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
>> As I played around with it, I found the HTTP approach more feasible
>> and less ugly than the mimetype handler approach. At first I figured
>> the idea of running a local HT
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 07:12:53PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> As I played around with it, I found the HTTP approach more feasible
> and less ugly than the mimetype handler approach. At first I figured
> the idea of running a local HTTP server would be a bit ugly, and Owen
> thought of some s
> Because i don't want a separate application with its own UI. I could
> embed a web control inside the desktop application, but then I've just
> reimplemented a browser. A terrible, poor one. So I'm using a real
> browser.
Fair enough
> No. It should work in any browser that supports the HTTP cro
2011/6/22 Erick Pérez :
> I think I'm late too, to this discussion.
> Simple question first, cause I'm kinda worried with the simple http
> server approach.
>
> What you need is the browser to talk with the system, and send the
> answers back to the website nope ?
>
> My point:
>
> Why don't you el
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 23:03 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:55 PM, ecyrbe wrote:
> > Thank you for the details. I do like what you are doing, just another bunch
> > of questions :
> > - is (validity-check) going to be added to prevent the shell from aborting?
>
> (val
Le mercredi 22 juin 2011 à 11:21 +0100, Richard Hughes a écrit :
> On 22 June 2011 10:57, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
> > PackageKit one could gain support for per-user extensions. What do you
> > think?
>
> PackageKit is firmly per-system rather than per-user. I'm not happy
> with the amount of f
On 22 June 2011 10:57, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
> PackageKit one could gain support for per-user extensions. What do you
> think?
PackageKit is firmly per-system rather than per-user. I'm not happy
with the amount of feature-creep that a per-user system would entail.
Richard
__
Sorry, Evolution kept saying me "Sending message (cancelled)", but it
did send them after all. :-/
___
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:56 AM, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
> Le mardi 21 juin 2011 à 17:11 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit :
>> I'm not going to do an upgrade automatically. Instead, the user will
>> get a simple notification telling him that extensions can be upgraded.
>> Clicking on it will op
Le mardi 21 juin 2011 à 17:11 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit :
> I'm not going to do an upgrade automatically. Instead, the user will
> get a simple notification telling him that extensions can be upgraded.
> Clicking on it will open the extensions.gnome.org website, where he
> can upgrade at his
Le mardi 21 juin 2011 à 17:11 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit :
> I'm not going to do an upgrade automatically. Instead, the user will
> get a simple notification telling him that extensions can be upgraded.
> Clicking on it will open the extensions.gnome.org website, where he
> can upgrade at his
Le mardi 21 juin 2011 à 17:11 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit :
> I'm not going to do an upgrade automatically. Instead, the user will
> get a simple notification telling him that extensions can be upgraded.
> Clicking on it will open the extensions.gnome.org website, where he
> can upgrade at his
Le mardi 21 juin 2011 à 17:11 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit :
> I'm not going to do an upgrade automatically. Instead, the user will
> get a simple notification telling him that extensions can be upgraded.
> Clicking on it will open the extensions.gnome.org website, where he
> can upgrade at his
On 21 June 2011 20:59, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> Extensions will need to explicitly list their dependencies. I don't
> know enough about PackageKit, but I'd like to say, "can you look for a
> GTop.typelib anywhere for the correct architecture", and hopefully it
> will work, even if the package pu
Aha, thanks: the key to success!
http://magcius.mecheye.net/shell/SweetTooth/Demos/LiveInstall.html
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:28 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:57:38PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
>> About that: I couldn't get the tag to work, so I uploaded it to
>> Yo
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:57:38PM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> About that: I couldn't get the tag to work, so I uploaded it to
> YouTube:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luZuhn5_b_8
>
> ... and the raw 12MB WebM file if you want it:
>
> http://magcius.mecheye.net/shell/SweetTooth/Demo
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Jasper St. Pierre
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Tim Cuthbertson wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Jasper St. Pierre
>> wrote:
Sorry if I'm late to the party with this suggestion.
>>>
>>> I'd rather late than never. I don't want to bre
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 5:11 PM, Jasper St. Pierre
wrote:
> Recap from last time:
>
> It seems like everything we discussed yesterday has gotten positive
> responses. If you have any ideas or concerns about this, please don't
> hesitate to ask.
>
> If you're curious, all the code that I demoed las
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:55 PM, ecyrbe wrote:
> Thank you for the details. I do like what you are doing, just another bunch
> of questions :
> - is (validity-check) going to be added to prevent the shell from aborting?
(validity-check) is an idea that Company had. I have no idea if it's
feasibl
Thank you for the details. I do like what you are doing, just another bunch
of questions :
- is (validity-check) going to be added to prevent the shell from aborting?
if so, do you need help to make patches to gnome-shell libraries
depedencies, and gjs as this seems to be a big review work?
- shema
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Tim Cuthbertson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Jasper St. Pierre
> wrote:
>>> Sorry if I'm late to the party with this suggestion.
>>
>> I'd rather late than never. I don't want to break this if people are
>> unhappy with what I've come up with.
>>
>>
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Jasper St. Pierre
wrote:
>> Sorry if I'm late to the party with this suggestion.
>
> I'd rather late than never. I don't want to break this if people are
> unhappy with what I've come up with.
>
>> but I think this
>> is where using zero install[0] for extensions
> Sorry if I'm late to the party with this suggestion.
I'd rather late than never. I don't want to break this if people are
unhappy with what I've come up with.
> but I think this
> is where using zero install[0] for extensions would shine:
>
> - feeds that contain only JS (i.e no compilation re
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 5:59 AM, Jasper St. Pierre
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Jasper St. Pierre
> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:54 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
>>> Thank you for the hard work you are providing. juste some first questions.
>>>
>>> 2011/6/21 Jasper St. Pierre
> As I played around with it, I found the HTTP approach more feasible
> and less ugly than the mimetype handler approach. At first I figured
> the idea of running a local HTTP server would be a bit ugly, and Owen
> thought of some security concerns, but there's nothing too critical
> (or unsolvabl
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:33 PM, John Stowers
wrote:
>
>>
>> For those curious, the website's partner in crime is
>> gnome-shell-extension-tool[2]. There's an option that runs a small
>> HTTP server which the web site can talk to. The HTTP server is
>> basically a dummy proxy so that the website c
>
> For those curious, the website's partner in crime is
> gnome-shell-extension-tool[2]. There's an option that runs a small
> HTTP server which the web site can talk to. The HTTP server is
> basically a dummy proxy so that the website can talk to DBus. Before
> this lands, I'll rewrite the HTTP
Recap from last time:
It seems like everything we discussed yesterday has gotten positive
responses. If you have any ideas or concerns about this, please don't
hesitate to ask.
If you're curious, all the code that I demoed last time, including
both the Stateful/Stateless approaches is indeed work
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Jasper St. Pierre
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:54 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
>> Thank you for the hard work you are providing. juste some first questions.
>>
>> 2011/6/21 Jasper St. Pierre
>>>
>>> Hey guys, it's Jasper.
>>>
>>> As part of my work on SweetTooth[0], I
On 21 June 2011 12:40, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> But my generic answers are "Yes" and "Yes". I'm unsure if I can do
> stuff to make PackageKit pop-up, or find the dependent extension
> install under the web-UI, we'll see.
Grab me on IRC (nick:hughsie) if you want any PackageKit help.
Richard.
_
Il giorno mar, 21/06/2011 alle 20.49 +1200, John Stowers ha scritto:
> On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 01:39 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> > Hey guys, it's Jasper.
> >
> > As part of my work on SweetTooth[0], I'm planning on a bunch of
> > changes to make the user experience for installing, enabling and
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 6:54 AM, ecyrbe wrote:
> Thank you for the hard work you are providing. juste some first questions.
>
> 2011/6/21 Jasper St. Pierre
>>
>> Hey guys, it's Jasper.
>>
>> As part of my work on SweetTooth[0], I'm planning on a bunch of
>> changes to make the user experience for
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 4:15 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 01:39:59AM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
>> * I want live extension enabling and disabling. The user experience
>> is "click a button on extensions.gnome3.org, it takes effect
>> immediately".
>
> Sysadmin releated:
Thank you for the hard work you are providing. juste some first questions.
2011/6/21 Jasper St. Pierre
> Hey guys, it's Jasper.
>
> As part of my work on SweetTooth[0], I'm planning on a bunch of
> changes to make the user experience for installing, enabling and
> disabling extensions better. Un
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 11:42 +0530, Vamsi Krishna Brahmajosyula wrote:
> Thanks alot.. I was waiting for this.
>
>
> I would like to suggest a little more, see if it makes sense.
> Lets assume we use the gnome tweak tool or some other place to
> enable/disable with out
> reloading the shell. N
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 01:39 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> Hey guys, it's Jasper.
>
> As part of my work on SweetTooth[0], I'm planning on a bunch of
> changes to make the user experience for installing, enabling and
> disabling extensions better. Unfortunately, I'm gonna have to break
> some s
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 01:39:59AM -0400, Jasper St. Pierre wrote:
> * I want live extension enabling and disabling. The user experience
> is "click a button on extensions.gnome3.org, it takes effect
> immediately".
Sysadmin releated: our domain name is gnome.org, gnome3.org is supposed
to be te
Thanks alot.. I was waiting for this.
I would like to suggest a little more, see if it makes sense.
Lets assume we use the gnome tweak tool or some other place to
enable/disable with out
reloading the shell. Now as an extension writer, I may also want to give a
little more options than
just enabl
89 matches
Mail list logo
