On 3 June 2011 14:31, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 02:04:17PM +0100, Ian Malone wrote:
>> On 3 June 2011 13:19, Olav Vitters wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 07:57:18AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> >> On 06/03/2011 05:39 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
>> >> ings.
>> >> >
>>
> Se
On 06/03/2011 05:56 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 06/03/2011 12:30 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 11:44:36AM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
Not quite. The addon site is run by Mozilla itself, there's at least a
>> Only the site. The addons itself are made by various developers.
>>
>
On 06/03/2011 12:30 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 11:44:36AM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
>> > Not quite. The addon site is run by Mozilla itself, there's at least a
> Only the site. The addons itself are made by various developers.
>
Of course. I didn't mean to suggest otherwise.
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 11:44:36AM -0700, Joe Zeff wrote:
> Not quite. The addon site is run by Mozilla itself, there's at least a
Only the site. The addons itself are made by various developers.
I said something like the addons site was being thought of. Just no
time, etc. So the site would be
On 06/03/2011 05:19 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> I agree it is not nice. Still, Firefox works exactly the same.
Not quite. The addon site is run by Mozilla itself, there's at least a
semblance of quality control (New addons are marked "experimental" and
are only downloadable if you have an account
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 02:04:17PM +0100, Ian Malone wrote:
>> On 3 June 2011 13:19, Olav Vitters wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 07:57:18AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> >> On 06/03/2011 05:39 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
>> >> ings.
>> >>
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 02:04:17PM +0100, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 3 June 2011 13:19, Olav Vitters wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 07:57:18AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> >> On 06/03/2011 05:39 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> >> ings.
> >> >
>
> >> I don't agree - I think the right solution is th
On 3 June 2011 13:19, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 07:57:18AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> On 06/03/2011 05:39 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
>> ings.
>> >
>> I don't agree - I think the right solution is that extensions vie to
>> be accepted as part of Gnome Core - otherwise its
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 12:30:48PM +0200, sguazt wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 09:52:48PM +0100, Ron Yorston wrote:
> >> Have you tried my GNOME Shell frippery extensions?
> >>
> >> http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/extensions/index.html
On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 07:57:18AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/03/2011 05:39 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> ings.
> >
> > Ideally extensions should be made available on an addons site similar to
> > what Firefox has. Then the timing problems becomes slightly less of an
> > issue.
> > Nothing
On 06/03/2011 05:39 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
ings.
>
> Ideally extensions should be made available on an addons site similar to
> what Firefox has. Then the timing problems becomes slightly less of an
> issue.
> Nothing like that is available at this moment though (help welcome:).
>
> At the momen
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 09:52:48PM +0100, Ron Yorston wrote:
>> Have you tried my GNOME Shell frippery extensions?
>>
>> http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/extensions/index.html
>
> Some of that functionality is already available in extensions
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 03:15:48PM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
> One possible problem with add-on extensions is that there is no
> guarantee they will continue to work as things evolve (much like firefox
> addons break as it evolves) unless they get absorbed into the core Gnome
> shell or the ad
On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 09:52:48PM +0100, Ron Yorston wrote:
> Have you tried my GNOME Shell frippery extensions?
>
>http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/extensions/index.html
Some of that functionality is already available in extensions.
For the new functionality, could you propose them in GNOME
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 11:53 PM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 10:52 PM, Ron Yorston wrote:
>> If you're quick you can be the first to download it!
>
> Downloaded :-) Will go to bed now though, but will take a look
> tomorrow. Seem to solve some issues I have been having though.
>
> L
On 06/02/2011 10:52 PM, Ron Yorston wrote:
> If you're quick you can be the first to download it!
Downloaded :-) Will go to bed now though, but will take a look
tomorrow. Seem to solve some issues I have been having though.
Lars
--
Lars E. Pettersson
http://www.sm6rpz.se/
--
users mailing li
Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
>Sadly the things mentioned in the links earlier in the thread does not
>solve my issues fully.
Have you tried my GNOME Shell frippery extensions?
http://intgat.tigress.co.uk/rmy/extensions/index.html
While you lot have been chattering here I've been busy releasing
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:48 AM, Pasha R wrote:
>
> My problem with extensions is that there is no easy way to enable and
> disable them on the fly and per user. All extensions I tried were
> activated for all users when installed and required logoff to be
> activated. It is possible to copy exten
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Genes MailLists wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 02:57 PM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
>
>>
>> My biggest problem with Gnome 3 is that things that I could do by moving
>> the mouse, and a single mouse click, now needs several moves and several
>> mouse clicks, this severely di
On 06/02/2011 03:22 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 06/02/2011 11:57 AM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
>> My biggest problem with Gnome 3 is that things that I could do by moving
>> the mouse, and a single mouse click, now needs several moves and several
>> mouse clicks, this severely disrupts my work flow.
>
On 06/02/2011 11:57 AM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
> My biggest problem with Gnome 3 is that things that I could do by moving
> the mouse, and a single mouse click, now needs several moves and several
> mouse clicks, this severely disrupts my work flow.
Interesting. Wasn't one of the big selling p
On 06/02/2011 02:57 PM, Lars E. Pettersson wrote:
>
> My biggest problem with Gnome 3 is that things that I could do by moving
> the mouse, and a single mouse click, now needs several moves and several
> mouse clicks, this severely disrupts my work flow. At the moment I have
> moved to Xfce (w
On 06/02/2011 02:10 AM, Digimer wrote:
> With that in mind, I'm quickly coming to like Gnome 3. It has wrinkles,
> but it is also a 3.0 release. I think it has a lot of promise, and I
> think people will come to like it as they get used to it. :)
My biggest problem with Gnome 3 is that things that
On 06/01/2011 07:54 PM, Antonio Olivares wrote:
> Dear folks,
>
> For some users that still want to give Gnome 3.0 a chance, I found a site
> which explains ways to get some of the things that they liked in prior Gnome
> releases. Please check it out and see if they are beneficial
>
> http://ars
Dear folks,
For some users that still want to give Gnome 3.0 a chance, I found a site which
explains ways to get some of the things that they liked in prior Gnome
releases. Please check it out and see if they are beneficial
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2011/06/howto-four-tweaks-to-b
25 matches
Mail list logo
