Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW schreef:
(the settings pane will get unusable by this
both in the old and the new version, though).
It becomes slightly better if you put the radiobuttons next to each other
(horizontally)
Ah . you already did :D.
Vincent
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
> P.S. the settings are not restored in the next session.
the idea was that settings should be set according to -dbg parameter, not
stored in QSettings.
pavel
>(the settings pane will get unusable by this
>both in the old and the new version, though).
It becomes slightly better if you put the radiobuttons next to each other
(horizontally)
Do we really need the box around it ? Otherwise the panel can shrink some more
without the controls to disappear.
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Pavel Sanda wrote:
>
> > can you force your structured pane not to affect the complete window size
> > so something like the attached is still possible like in previous version?
>
> I'm not sure we'll get it _that_ small, but of course the size can be
> forcibly shrin
Pavel Sanda wrote:
> can you force your structured pane not to affect the complete window size
> so something like the attached is still possible like in previous version?
I'm not sure we'll get it _that_ small, but of course the size can be
forcibly shrinked (the settings pane will get unusable
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> Speaking of minimal size, what I view here as minimal size with qt 4.2
>> is not that minimal:
>
> Well, this is certainly not how it is supposed to look.
Please try again. I guess it can be still optimized in terms of minimal
height.
Jürgen
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Speaking of minimal size, what I view here as minimal size with qt 4.2
> is not that minimal:
Well, this is certainly not how it is supposed to look.
I'll fix that.
Jürgen
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
> This message in the statusbar is not enough then ?
it depends :) they are enough if nothing gets wrong or you dont kill them by
hovering the mouse over things. debug window is more stable if you really want
to see numbers, having history etc.
pavel
>what is showstopper for me in this proposal is the minimal
>widget size - both in terms for width and height. i was
>particularly careful that it can be used as a very small
>window hidden somewhere on desktop - i want to use this
>as output window for svn results and want to have the
>dialog to b
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> I committed a proposal for an alternative UI, which is more structured.
right the columns are killed again; but i'm not going to fight for settings
panel ;)
what is showstopper for me in this proposal is the minimal widget size - both
in terms for width and height. i
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> You mean you committed my proposal?
Amongst others, yes.
Jürgen
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Shouldn't the "All debug" and "No debug" be in radio buttons instead? I
guess I'd like to have 3 radio buttons:
* All debug
* No debug
* Custom debug
Choosing the first two would disable all checkboxes and choosing the
last one will enabl
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Shouldn't the "All debug" and "No debug" be in radio buttons instead? I
> guess I'd like to have 3 radio buttons:
>
> * All debug
> * No debug
> * Custom debug
>
> Choosing the first two would disable all checkboxes and choosing the
> last one will enable them.
I com
Peter Kümmel wrote:
> Simply clicking on the checkbox is much more convenient than selecting
> a item in a combobox.
Checkboxes have a different function (at least in the LyX UI). And tristates
are the most ugly UI I can imagine. We avoid them for good reason.
We use checkboxes for non-mutually
Am Mittwoch, den 06.01.2010, 10:56 +0100 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes:
> Jürgen Spitzmüller writes:
>
> > Peter Kümmel wrote:
> >> I've committed a patch: It's still a checkbox but with three states: it
> >> toggles between all levels enabled, all disabled, and previous selected
> >> levels. Hope
Am Mittwoch, den 06.01.2010, 10:46 +0100 schrieb Jürgen Spitzmüller:
> Peter Kümmel wrote:
> > I've committed a patch: It's still a checkbox but with three states: it
> > toggles between all levels enabled, all disabled, and previous selected
> > levels. Hope it's perfect now ;)
>
> From an UI poi
Jürgen Spitzmüller writes:
> Peter Kümmel wrote:
>> I've committed a patch: It's still a checkbox but with three states: it
>> toggles between all levels enabled, all disabled, and previous selected
>> levels. Hope it's perfect now ;)
>
> From an UI point of view, I'd very much prefer a combo or
Peter Kümmel wrote:
> I've committed a patch: It's still a checkbox but with three states: it
> toggles between all levels enabled, all disabled, and previous selected
> levels. Hope it's perfect now ;)
From an UI point of view, I'd very much prefer a combo or radio buttons
instead. We do not use
Am Dienstag, den 05.01.2010, 15:12 +0100 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Pavel, Peter,
> >>
> >> Shouldn't the "All debug" and "No debug" be in radio buttons
> >> instead? I guess I'd like to have 3 radio buttons:
> >>
> >> * All debug
> >> * No de
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
Pavel, Peter,
Shouldn't the "All debug" and "No debug" be in radio buttons
instead? I guess I'd like to have 3 radio buttons:
* All debug
* No debug
* Custom debug
Choosing the first two would disable all checkboxes and
choosing the last one will enable
>Pavel, Peter,
>
>Shouldn't the "All debug" and "No debug" be in radio buttons
>instead? I guess I'd like to have 3 radio buttons:
>
>* All debug
>* No debug
>* Custom debug
>
>Choosing the first two would disable all checkboxes and
>choosing the last one will enable them.
>From the r32764 threa
Pavel, Peter,
Shouldn't the "All debug" and "No debug" be in radio buttons instead? I
guess I'd like to have 3 radio buttons:
* All debug
* No debug
* Custom debug
Choosing the first two would disable all checkboxes and choosing the
last one will enable them.
Abdel.
22 matches
Mail list logo
