From: Brad D. <buc...@us...> - 2003-09-28 01:10:25
|
p dont think said: [snip] >> Thanks. I'd prefer to stick with the official SM then. So then the >> question: are there plans to support icons in the menu bar any time >> soon?, if not, why?. Some ppl think the icons look cool (particularly >> I don't mind, while SM works :-) ). > > It's in the works. There is possibility of more graphical hacks ala > plugins in the near future, but what you'll really want to look out for > is when we template the whole thing, although that is going to take a > while. And while we're on that topic;-) For one of the plugins I'm working on, I added a new "frames" hook. I know this is an interm solution until templates are in, but it seems to be usefull for me anyways. Rather than forcing a specific frame layout, it will allow plugins to define the number of frames for the app and where the are located. Though for things to work you still need to remember to use the current names for each of the two main frames. That combined with making some of the current hooks more consistent in where they are called from and passing some more info also afford good extensions for an interm solution. Personally, I don't prefer the "waiting" game for templates and so I'm tweaking code, adding hooks and creating plugins myself. But I digress... So does the idea of a new "frames" hook sound like something that would be benefitial in SM or should it remain a patch. All the BEST, Brad -- cat /dev/null > mybrain |
From: p d. t. <pdo...@an...> - 2003-09-27 22:11:12
|
> >> Thanks. I'd prefer to stick with the official SM then. So then the > >> question: are there plans to support icons in the menu bar any time > >> soon?, if not, why?. Some ppl think the icons look cool (particularly > >> I don't mind, while SM works :-) ). > > > > It's in the works. There is possibility of more graphical hacks ala > > plugins in the near future, but what you'll really want to look out for > > is when we template the whole thing, although that is going to take a > > while. > > And while we're on that topic;-) For one of the plugins I'm working on, I > added a new "frames" hook. I know this is an interm solution until templates > are in, but it seems to be usefull for me anyways. Rather than forcing a > specific frame layout, it will allow plugins to define the number of frames > for the app and where the are located. Though for things to work you still > need to remember to use the current names for each of the two main frames. > > That combined with making some of the current hooks more consistent in where > they are called from and passing some more info also afford good extensions > for an interm solution. Personally, I don't prefer the "waiting" game for > templates and so I'm tweaking code, adding hooks and creating plugins myself. > But I digress... > > So does the idea of a new "frames" hook sound like something that would be > benefitial in SM or should it remain a patch. Send along a patch and we can discuss... |