From: Tim R. <tim...@co...> - 2005-03-11 22:27:44
|
I can't figure out where to stick this, so I'll just start a new thread. After all, what business do my ideas, which of course are right, have in these other threads anyway? ;) Let's take Sean's status selector widget, and stick it in some kind of expander/collasper (probably custom) widget. So the status selector now looks like in Sean's widgets (see http://gaim.sourceforge.net/sean/status.php#widget), except its crowned by something that looks like that little bar with an arrow you've seen in the mozilla slide bar and stuff. Now, its worth noting that, at least last time I used HEAD, which was a long time ago, the status selector had two modes. The single account online mode (which had all the accounts possible states), and the multiple accounts online mode (which had a limited subset of possible states). So there would be no expander if you have only a single account online, it would be just like things are now. You click expand, and suddenly one widget for each enabled account appears above the global status widget. These widgets are in the single account mode, they have all the prpl specific status options. They probably have the prpl icon too, instead of the gaim dude. You click collapse and they all disappear again. You now feel comfortable in that the global status selector actually works, your accounts really are in the state they should be in. So you expand it again, and set your MSN account to hidden. When you collapse it, the msn account is still shown, because it is out of sync. If you set it back to the same state as the global status, the widget hides again (unless you expand again). Now, jabber.org goes down again. Suddenly your jabber.org status selector is visible, showing you that it got disconnected and is reconnecting. It goes away when it's successful and thus back in sync with the global status. In other words, prpl status widgets always show if not in sync with the global status widget. They are otherwise hidden, unless the sidebar like thing is expanded to show them. Normal use case would be to keep it hidden unless you need to access it, then hide it again. I think this approch has all the simplicity of Sean's. In the single account case, it is exactly the same. In the multiple account's all in the same status, it is exactly the same except for an expander that no one is making you click. Eventually some account is going to come out of sync, and this UI makes it especially easy to see that, and possibly do something about it. It makes it very obvious if you, e.g. set the global status to invisible, but some account doesn't support that and is still visible. It makes it easy to set your accounts to different states, but encourages you to keep most of them in the same global state. --Tim |
From: Luke S. <lsc...@us...> - 2005-03-11 22:37:12
|
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 04:27:35PM -0600, Tim Ringenbach wrote: <snip> > > You click expand, and suddenly one widget for each enabled account > appears above the global status widget. These widgets are in the single > account mode, they have all the prpl specific status options. They > probably have the prpl icon too, instead of the gaim dude. You click > collapse and they all disappear again. You now feel comfortable in that > the global status selector actually works, your accounts really are in > the state they should be in. They certainly have the prpl icon, they may have the buddy icon as well. <snip the rest> I like this proposal, as worded, with just the above minor correction. I think it makes very good compromise with sean's insistance on one account at a time being the most common case and with his insistance that all accounts being exactly the same is most of the rest. I still disagree with both assertions, but this leaves us with a mostly usable interface even if he's wrong. The one thing it lacks that I would like is the ability to save that "complex state" ie the default and the exception, to restore to it on the fly at some future point. Kingant's model had, I think, the best interface for this, and I think some version's of sean's included it as well. luke |
From: Ethan B. <ebl...@cs...> - 2005-03-11 23:23:59
|
[Elide Tim's proposal as it was not present in the mail to which I am replying; as I understand it, basically Sean's status selector plus a Moz sidebar-style expanding window with status selectors for individual accounts.] Luke Schierer spake unto us the following wisdom: > I think it makes very good compromise with sean's insistance on one=20 > account at a time being the most common case and with his insistance=20 > that all accounts being exactly the same is most of the rest. I still=20 > disagree with both assertions, but this leaves us with a mostly usable=20 > interface even if he's wrong. For the record, I have no idea about the general case of one account vs. multiple accounts, but I am in total agreement that all online accounts having the same state is (or should be) typical and the optimized case. > The one thing it lacks that I would like is the ability to save that=20 > "complex state" ie the default and the exception, to restore to it on=20 > the fly at some future point. Kingant's model had, I think, the best=20 > interface for this, and I think some version's of sean's included it=20 > as well. For those of you with access to OSX, take this moment to open a print dialog and look at the print presets menu for a given printer; at the bottom, after the various saved setups, it has a "Save" item. Actually, it has like five items, but I would collapse them to a single "Save" [name negotiable] item which might allow some not-strictly-saving actions to take place. I don't know that this setup is ideal by any means, but it seems relatively intuitive and it is common enough to be recognized. Ethan --=20 The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws [that have no remedy for evils]. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. -- Cesare Beccaria, "On Crimes and Punishments", 1764 |
From: Gary K. <gr...@re...> - 2005-03-11 23:28:13
|
On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 17:36 -0500, Luke Schierer wrote: > The one thing it lacks that I would like is the ability to save that=20 > "complex state" ie the default and the exception, to restore to it on=20 > the fly at some future point. Kingant's model had, I think, the best=20 > interface for this, and I think some version's of sean's included it=20 > as well. >=20 > luke I can see people wanting to safe the complex states, but besides that the rest sounds good to me. --=20 Gary Kramlich <gr...@re...> |
From: Mark D. <ma...@ki...> - 2005-03-11 23:13:51
|
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:27:35 -0600, Tim Ringenbach wrote *snip everything* I think this has a lot of promise (that's good). However, I also think this would take a good bit more work than a basic status selector. And at the rate we're going, I don't see us EVER releasing Gaim 2.0 (that's bad). I would like to see something that works, first. Something simple and usable, then maybe we could release 2.0. THEN we could look into making changes like this. Eh, maybe I'm just being a crockety old man. Get off my porch you hoodlums! -Mark |
From: Tim R. <tim...@co...> - 2005-03-11 23:40:23
|
Mark Doliner wrote: > On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 16:27:35 -0600, Tim Ringenbach wrote > *snip everything* > > I think this has a lot of promise (that's good). However, I also think this > would take a good bit more work than a basic status selector. And at the rate > we're going, I don't see us EVER releasing Gaim 2.0 (that's bad). I was hoping it wouldn't be that hard to do. After all, it's reusing the widget sean's already working on. But I guess there are some tricky parts. > I would like to see something that works, first. Something simple and usable, > then maybe we could release 2.0. THEN we could look into making changes like > this. Sure. If it doesn't get coded in time for 2.0, but comes soonish after it, that wouldn't be so bad I guess. But like I said I'm hoping it reuses enough code that it doesn't take too long to code. --Tim |
From: Stu T. <st...@no...> - 2005-03-12 02:08:47
|
Yeah. Definitely. +10 to this, it's almost exactly what I've been wanting to suggest for weeks (months? years? this has been going on for so long I'm surprised we haven't got Gaim 10.0 out yet), but haven't been able to visualize what I wanted until Tim suggested it. Regards, Stu. PS. I just quit the "email quoting school", and I liked what Tim said, so you can read it again: On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 17:27, Tim Ringenbach wrote: > I can't figure out where to stick this, so I'll just start a new thread. > After all, what business do my ideas, which of course are right, have > in these other threads anyway? ;) > > Let's take Sean's status selector widget, and stick it in some kind of > expander/collasper (probably custom) widget. > > So the status selector now looks like in Sean's widgets (see > http://gaim.sourceforge.net/sean/status.php#widget), except its crowned > by something that looks like that little bar with an arrow you've seen > in the mozilla slide bar and stuff. > > Now, its worth noting that, at least last time I used HEAD, which was a > long time ago, the status selector had two modes. The single account > online mode (which had all the accounts possible states), and the > multiple accounts online mode (which had a limited subset of possible > states). > > So there would be no expander if you have only a single account online, > it would be just like things are now. > > You click expand, and suddenly one widget for each enabled account > appears above the global status widget. These widgets are in the single > account mode, they have all the prpl specific status options. They > probably have the prpl icon too, instead of the gaim dude. You click > collapse and they all disappear again. You now feel comfortable in that > the global status selector actually works, your accounts really are in > the state they should be in. > > So you expand it again, and set your MSN account to hidden. When you > collapse it, the msn account is still shown, because it is out of sync. > If you set it back to the same state as the global status, the widget > hides again (unless you expand again). > > Now, jabber.org goes down again. Suddenly your jabber.org status > selector is visible, showing you that it got disconnected and is > reconnecting. It goes away when it's successful and thus back in sync > with the global status. > > In other words, prpl status widgets always show if not in sync with the > global status widget. They are otherwise hidden, unless the sidebar like > thing is expanded to show them. Normal use case would be to keep it > hidden unless you need to access it, then hide it again. > > > I think this approch has all the simplicity of Sean's. In the single > account case, it is exactly the same. In the multiple account's all in > the same status, it is exactly the same except for an expander that no > one is making you click. Eventually some account is going to come out of > sync, and this UI makes it especially easy to see that, and possibly do > something about it. It makes it very obvious if you, e.g. set the global > status to invisible, but some account doesn't support that and is still > visible. It makes it easy to set your accounts to different states, but > encourages you to keep most of them in the same global state. > > --Tim > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Gaim-devel mailing list > Gai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gaim-devel |
From: Kevin S. <ke...@si...> - 2005-03-12 10:18:48
|
Stu Tomlinson wrote: > Yeah. Definitely. > > +10 to this, it's almost exactly what I've been wanting to suggest for > weeks (months? years? this has been going on for so long I'm surprised > we haven't got Gaim 10.0 out yet), but haven't been able to visualize > what I wanted until Tim suggested it. > > Regards, > > > Stu. > PS. I just quit the "email quoting school", and I liked what Tim said, > so you can read it again: > > On Fri, 2005-03-11 at 17:27, Tim Ringenbach wrote: > > >> I can't figure out where to stick this, so I'll just start a new >> thread. After all, what business do my ideas, which of course are >> right, have in these other threads anyway? ;) >> >> Let's take Sean's status selector widget, and stick it in some kind >> of expander/collasper (probably custom) widget. >> >> So the status selector now looks like in Sean's widgets (see >> http://gaim.sourceforge.net/sean/status.php#widget), except its >> crowned by something that looks like that little bar with an arrow >> you've seen in the mozilla slide bar and stuff. >> >> Now, its worth noting that, at least last time I used HEAD, which was >> a long time ago, the status selector had two modes. The single >> account online mode (which had all the accounts possible states), and >> the multiple accounts online mode (which had a limited subset of >> possible states). >> >> So there would be no expander if you have only a single account >> online, it would be just like things are now. >> >> You click expand, and suddenly one widget for each enabled account >> appears above the global status widget. These widgets are in the >> single account mode, they have all the prpl specific status options. >> They probably have the prpl icon too, instead of the gaim dude. You >> click collapse and they all disappear again. You now feel comfortable >> in that the global status selector actually works, your accounts >> really are in the state they should be in. >> >> So you expand it again, and set your MSN account to hidden. When you >> collapse it, the msn account is still shown, because it is out of >> sync. If you set it back to the same state as the global status, the >> widget hides again (unless you expand again). >> >> Now, jabber.org goes down again. Suddenly your jabber.org status >> selector is visible, showing you that it got disconnected and is >> reconnecting. It goes away when it's successful and thus back in sync >> with the global status. >> >> In other words, prpl status widgets always show if not in sync with >> the global status widget. They are otherwise hidden, unless the >> sidebar like thing is expanded to show them. Normal use case would be >> to keep it hidden unless you need to access it, then hide it again. >> >> >> I think this approch has all the simplicity of Sean's. In the single >> account case, it is exactly the same. In the multiple account's all >> in the same status, it is exactly the same except for an expander >> that no one is making you click. Eventually some account is going to >> come out of sync, and this UI makes it especially easy to see that, >> and possibly do something about it. It makes it very obvious if you, >> e.g. set the global status to invisible, but some account doesn't >> support that and is still visible. It makes it easy to set your >> accounts to different states, but encourages you to keep most of them >> in the same global state. >> >> --Tim >> > I'm going to second Stu's vote. I think this is smart and powerful, without being sloppy and confusing. Tim, you rock. Now perhaps someone can make this work? :) Kevin |
From: Adil <ad...@ya...> - 2005-03-12 15:33:12
|
hello. i have something here: http://adil.dotgeek.org/gaim/icons.png notice the status "history" at the bottom, which shows the latest changes of status for any account. this "history" bar remains visible in the buddy-list as well. so if an account gets disconnected for some reasons (like jabber.org is down, as in Tim's example), it is shown at the "history" bar. this is what i have in mind to sort-of keep track of out-of-sync accounts. since tabs are not very popular, you can ignore the tabs at the top and pretend there were mozilla-like slide-bars (which, by the way, i am not familiar with, but the screenshots posted earlier looked good, and especially because i don't know which widget it is! :)) -- Adil __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball. http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/ |
From: Nathan W. <fac...@fa...> - 2005-03-12 20:37:38
Attachments:
signature.asc
|
+1 This rocks. Who is gonna step up and implement this? I disagree that this can wait for post-2.0. Tim points out that he hasn't used HEAD in a while. Not to single him out, but that's awful, and I don't think he's the only one. The reason I'm guessing is that HEAD isn't the most usable thing right now. I'm using it, and living with its limitations, because I was hoping that it would inspire me to fix them. This hasn't been the case, as I've been busy, but I'd really like HEAD to get to a usable state. Getting this usable NOW will let us get more of us using HEAD, and finding all the other bugs (there are plenty). Also, people are going to throw insane hissy-fits if they can't set status separately on individual accounts. That is a HUGE step backwards in functionality, and I don't think we can allow it. If it takes another month, it takes another month. People really aren't missing much by being "stuck" with 1.x, and I'd rather release a finished polished product with 2.0.0 than something that's mostly implemented. If people want mostly implemented, they can check out CVS. Tim Ringenbach wrote: > I can't figure out where to stick this, so I'll just start a new thread. > After all, what business do my ideas, which of course are right, have > in these other threads anyway? ;) > > Let's take Sean's status selector widget, and stick it in some kind of > expander/collasper (probably custom) widget. > > So the status selector now looks like in Sean's widgets (see > http://gaim.sourceforge.net/sean/status.php#widget), except its crowned > by something that looks like that little bar with an arrow you've seen > in the mozilla slide bar and stuff. > > Now, its worth noting that, at least last time I used HEAD, which was a > long time ago, the status selector had two modes. The single account > online mode (which had all the accounts possible states), and the > multiple accounts online mode (which had a limited subset of possible > states). > > So there would be no expander if you have only a single account online, > it would be just like things are now. > > You click expand, and suddenly one widget for each enabled account > appears above the global status widget. These widgets are in the single > account mode, they have all the prpl specific status options. They > probably have the prpl icon too, instead of the gaim dude. You click > collapse and they all disappear again. You now feel comfortable in that > the global status selector actually works, your accounts really are in > the state they should be in. > > So you expand it again, and set your MSN account to hidden. When you > collapse it, the msn account is still shown, because it is out of sync. > If you set it back to the same state as the global status, the widget > hides again (unless you expand again). > > Now, jabber.org goes down again. Suddenly your jabber.org status > selector is visible, showing you that it got disconnected and is > reconnecting. It goes away when it's successful and thus back in sync > with the global status. > > In other words, prpl status widgets always show if not in sync with the > global status widget. They are otherwise hidden, unless the sidebar like > thing is expanded to show them. Normal use case would be to keep it > hidden unless you need to access it, then hide it again. > > > I think this approch has all the simplicity of Sean's. In the single > account case, it is exactly the same. In the multiple account's all in > the same status, it is exactly the same except for an expander that no > one is making you click. Eventually some account is going to come out of > sync, and this UI makes it especially easy to see that, and possibly do > something about it. It makes it very obvious if you, e.g. set the global > status to invisible, but some account doesn't support that and is still > visible. It makes it easy to set your accounts to different states, but > encourages you to keep most of them in the same global state. > > --Tim > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide > Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. > Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Gaim-devel mailing list > Gai...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gaim-devel |
From: Luke S. <lsc...@us...> - 2005-03-12 20:58:19
|
On Sat, Mar 12, 2005 at 03:37:29PM -0500, Nathan Walp wrote: > +1 > > This rocks. Who is gonna step up and implement this? > > I disagree that this can wait for post-2.0. Tim points out that he > hasn't used HEAD in a while. Not to single him out, but that's awful, > and I don't think he's the only one. The reason I'm guessing is that > HEAD isn't the most usable thing right now. I'm using it, and living > with its limitations, because I was hoping that it would inspire me to > fix them. This hasn't been the case, as I've been busy, but I'd really > like HEAD to get to a usable state. Getting this usable NOW will let us > get more of us using HEAD, and finding all the other bugs (there are > plenty). > > Also, people are going to throw insane hissy-fits if they can't set > status separately on individual accounts. That is a HUGE step backwards > in functionality, and I don't think we can allow it. If it takes > another month, it takes another month. People really aren't missing > much by being "stuck" with 1.x, and I'd rather release a finished > polished product with 2.0.0 than something that's mostly implemented. > If people want mostly implemented, they can check out CVS. agreed. now convince our fearless leader of this :-) luke |
From: Sean E. <sea...@bi...> - 2005-03-12 21:42:03
|
On Sat, 2005-03-12 at 15:57 -0500, Luke Schierer wrote: > agreed. now convince our fearless leader of this :-) Who has been strangely silent in this thread thus far.... |
From: Sean E. <sea...@bi...> - 2005-03-13 22:20:39
|
On Sat, 2005-03-12 at 16:42 -0500, Sean Egan wrote: > Who has been strangely silent in this thread thus far.... It would be entirely foolish of me to ignore the anonymous approval of this idea. And, I agree this is the best idea so far. We'll definitely include some variation of this idea into Gaim. However, because *someone's* gotta play devil's advocate, and everyone expects me to be against any status UI idea that gets proposed here anyway, you're all stupid and this idea totally sucks. A few questions: How well does this scale to large number of accounts? Each statusbox is 30px or 126 pixels. I have 7 active accounts. 882 pixels of height is quite a lot. Do we solve this with scrollbars and a gtkviewport? Is this intended to be instead of or in addition to the "New status" window? Would just putting this in the new status window make more or less sense than putting it in the buddy list? Seeing the statuses of your accounts then takes one more click. -s. |
From: Luke S. <lsc...@us...> - 2005-03-13 23:33:49
|
On Sun, Mar 13, 2005 at 05:21:41PM -0500, Sean Egan wrote: > On Sat, 2005-03-12 at 16:42 -0500, Sean Egan wrote: > > Who has been strangely silent in this thread thus far.... > > It would be entirely foolish of me to ignore the anonymous approval of I think you meant unanimous approval ;-) > this idea. And, I agree this is the best idea so far. We'll definitely > include some variation of this idea into Gaim. > > However, because *someone's* gotta play devil's advocate, and everyone > expects me to be against any status UI idea that gets proposed here > anyway, you're all stupid and this idea totally sucks. I KNEW you'd say that ;-) :-P > > A few questions: > How well does this scale to large number of accounts? Each statusbox is > 30px or 126 pixels. I have 7 active accounts. 882 pixels of height is > quite a lot. Do we solve this with scrollbars and a gtkviewport? its only happening for enabled accounts, at 800x600, I think that means 600 is the hight? so that'd be 3 accounts + the gaim dude before we need to scroll. so presumably we will need to scroll. at 1024x768, that'd still only be 5 + the gaim dude. alternately, we could make the individual accounts somewhat smaller. that might not be a bad idea, but I need to see cvs head again before I'm sure I like it. > > Is this intended to be instead of or in addition to the "New status" > window? Would just putting this in the new status window make more or > less sense than putting it in the buddy list? Seeing the statuses of > your accounts then takes one more click. > I think the new status window comes into play if you click Ethan's "save" button. luke > > -s. |
From: Adil <ad...@ya...> - 2005-03-15 19:33:50
|
hello. i have uploaded a patch here: http://adil.dotgeek.org/gaim/status_ui.diff this patch was made against 1.1.4. i am not sure whether all the devs use cvs or some use 1.1.4 as well. if anyone does use 1.1.4, and decides to try out this patch, it'd be "not-too-bad" :-) there are three defines at the top. depending on these, the buddy-list can look either like http://adil.dotgeek.org/gaim/expander.png or http://adil.dotgeek.org/gaim/icons.png (neither of which ... ahem ... might be what you are really looking for) (i hope i am not getting too annoying with this) -- Adil __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo |
From: Luke S. <lsc...@us...> - 2005-03-15 19:42:04
|
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 11:33:40AM -0800, Adil wrote: > hello. > > i have uploaded a patch here: > http://adil.dotgeek.org/gaim/status_ui.diff > > this patch was made against 1.1.4. i am not sure whether > all the devs use cvs or some use 1.1.4 as well. if most of us are *using* oldstatus, or what is currently 1.2.0cvs. however patches such as this should be against cvs HEAD, the default of no -r flag is used. This branch will eventually become 2.0.0 luke |
From: Tim R. <tim...@co...> - 2005-03-15 23:59:17
|
Adil wrote: > hello. > > i have uploaded a patch here: > http://adil.dotgeek.org/gaim/status_ui.diff > > this patch was made against 1.1.4. i am not sure whether > all the devs use cvs or some use 1.1.4 as well. if > anyone does use 1.1.4, and decides to try out this > patch, it'd be "not-too-bad" :-) > > there are three defines at the top. depending on these, > the buddy-list can look either like > http://adil.dotgeek.org/gaim/expander.png or > http://adil.dotgeek.org/gaim/icons.png > (neither of which ... ahem ... might be what you are > really looking for) > > (i hope i am not getting too annoying with this) erm, what's up with this? If it's supposed to be what was discussed in this thread, it has a couple big problems. First, it's not based off of the HEAD aka 2.0.0cvs code. It doesn't use sean's widget status widget, which I linked to the screenshots of and stuff, and which can be found in HEAD. Also, I really didn't have a list/treeview in mind. Anyway, Sean is in charge of the status rewrite, especially the new status UI. You'll need to work really closely with him if you except to get anything accepted. This is not always easy to do. --Tim |
From: Sean E. <sea...@bi...> - 2005-03-16 00:29:06
|
On Tue, 2005-03-15 at 17:57 -0600, Tim Ringenbach wrote: > erm, what's up with this? His ideas were discussed at length previously, and are wholly unrelated to yours. -s. |
From: Tim R. <tim...@co...> - 2005-03-16 23:40:51
|
Sean Egan wrote: > However, because *someone's* gotta play devil's advocate, and everyone > expects me to be against any status UI idea that gets proposed here > anyway, you're all stupid and this idea totally sucks. Are you just being funny here, or are there things about it you really do think suck? > A few questions: > How well does this scale to large number of accounts? Each statusbox is > 30px or 126 pixels. I have 7 active accounts. 882 pixels of height is > quite a lot. Do we solve this with scrollbars and a gtkviewport? I would say, use a custom expander thingy, (although, now that I look at it, gtk 2.4 does have an expander widget). What I'm thinking is, all the status widgets, including the global one, go in it as children, and it automaticly puts them in a gtkviewport or something. Hm, I guess put them all in an vbox, and the vbox in the view port. But what it would do is, hide all the widgets in it except the global status selector, and when you expand it, it shows those widgets, thus making itself bigger, possibly needing to scroll. It's pretty custom in that it always shows one widget (the global one) and sometimes always shows other ones, based on if they're out of sync with the global one. > Is this intended to be instead of or in addition to the "New status" > window? Would just putting this in the new status window make more or > less sense than putting it in the buddy list? Seeing the statuses of > your accounts then takes one more click. I think I'd rather be able to see my statuses with only one click. If we do it this way, we can consider applying for a patent. Most of the time, I probably want to do more than just see my statuses, I want to change one. So we're talking two or three clicks to accomplish things already. I didn't really think about how this would interact with the "New status" window though. So I'm not really sure. One thing that comes to mind though, is that the individual account status widgets need the account name in them somewhere, whereas the normal, global one doesn't. I hope that doesn't make them ugly, or significantly bigger. --Tim |
From: Mark D. <ma...@ki...> - 2005-03-12 22:36:47
|
On Sat, 12 Mar 2005 15:37:29 -0500, Nathan Walp wrote > I disagree that this can wait for post-2.0. Tim points out that he > hasn't used HEAD in a while. Not to single him out, but that's > awful, and I don't think he's the only one. The reason I'm guessing > is that HEAD isn't the most usable thing right now. I can't even compile HEAD because I'm using gtk 2.4. And FYI, I talked to Sean a week ago and we both kind of agree that Gaim 2.0 should be usable with gtk 2.0 (and not require, e.g. 2.4 or higher). -Mark |