From: Warren T. <wt...@re...> - 2005-06-09 21:18:19
|
Etan Reisner wrote: > I don't particularly have any input on the majority of this thread, I do > think that removing the preference when in Gnome sets a bad precedent. > It indicates that gaim is going to (in some special way) make > allowances/changes for the (WM/)DE that it is being run under. I'm not > sure we want to put ourselves in the position of having done that, > unless we are willing to accept similar code to detect KDE (and any > other WMs/DEs) that provide their own preferences for this sort of > thing. > > I would suggest that we might want to try having gaim try gnome-open as > it's first attempt and use that iff we are running within Gnome (unless > we decide we want to default to that if it exists regardless of Gnome > running). This allows us to use the Gnome default for any people that > happen to be running Gnome, while also allowing them to use something > different for gaim (if they so choose), and it allows us not to > special-case Gnome in our code. My take is that hiding the preference is only really a problem in the earlier versions of GNOME where gnome-open was broken. (2.4 was probably the first working version.) I disagreed with upstream's decision to hide the Browser option in prefs a while ago because I thought it was inconsistent and even wrong for RHEL3 and FC1, so Fedora has a tiny patch to unhide it. Unhiding it did not hurt anybody, and not a single person has complained about this. Warren Togami wt...@re... |
From: Luke S. <lsc...@us...> - 2005-06-03 16:21:41
|
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 12:04:32PM -0400, Sean Egan wrote: > On 6/3/05, Luke Schierer <lsc...@us...> wrote: > > > Also, debian has a "sensible-browser" script that always attempts to > > > find/use the best web browser; why not detect whether users are > > > running debian and slash the browser pref there too? > > > > This is a good idea. > > I'd imagine this would be something Robot101 would want to decide > himself in the Debian packages. I could see attempting to detect > Debian as being potentially harmful. I was simply thinking that sensible-browser is an executable, and it'd be easy to see if its there, just like we check for the others. luke |
From: Levi B. <tak...@gm...> - 2005-06-03 16:49:30
|
> I was simply thinking that sensible-browser is an executable, and > it'd be easy to see if its there, just like we check for the others. It even shows up in the GNOME browser dialog... :-P --=20 Debianista! |