Comments on: Zenity http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/ "Many window managers are like Marshmallow Froot Loops; Metacity is like Cheerios." Sun, 26 Sep 2010 15:08:40 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Shawn http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/comment-page-1/#comment-343 Shawn Tue, 01 Apr 2008 10:44:08 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/#comment-343 I agree with JD that you should have a soft dependency on zenity because it might not always be available. But it should be at least encouraged by being used by default. The built in metacity-dialog code should be bare minimal GTK code that is only invoked as a fall back measure. Or else I think it maybe best to just make zenity a hard decency. I agree with JD that you should have a soft dependency on zenity because it might not always be available. But it should be at least encouraged by being used by default. The built in metacity-dialog code should be bare minimal GTK code that is only invoked as a fall back measure. Or else I think it maybe best to just make zenity a hard decency.

]]> By: Henrique http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/comment-page-1/#comment-342 Henrique Tue, 01 Apr 2008 00:29:43 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/#comment-342 Making metacity depend on zenity is a good idea after all: zenity isnt much trouble, and in the end, its very useful to install anyway. People would use zenity a lot more if metacity starts making use of it. Making metacity depend on zenity is a good idea after all: zenity isnt much trouble, and in the end, its very useful to install anyway. People would use zenity a lot more if metacity starts making use of it.

]]> By: JD http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/comment-page-1/#comment-339 JD Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:42:37 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/#comment-339 Personally, i think replacing metacity-dialog with Zenity would be a good idea. It gives metacity a slimmer code-base and it kind of goes moreso with the *nix ideals of "shared libraries" wherein if there's a library or another piece of code that does what you need, why write your own code? Also, Zenity is included in the GNOME base install on almost every distro i've tried in the past few years (Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, Gentoo, etc). As a side option, you could have the Zenity code in a current .c file and have the metacity-dialog code in a separate .c file where if it can't find Zenity, it falls back to metacity-dialog. Personally, i think replacing metacity-dialog with Zenity would be a good idea. It gives metacity a slimmer code-base and it kind of goes moreso with the *nix ideals of “shared libraries” wherein if there’s a library or another piece of code that does what you need, why write your own code?

Also, Zenity is included in the GNOME base install on almost every distro i’ve tried in the past few years (Fedora, Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, Gentoo, etc). As a side option, you could have the Zenity code in a current .c file and have the metacity-dialog code in a separate .c file where if it can’t find Zenity, it falls back to metacity-dialog.

]]> By: ᛏᚦ » Blog Archive » And it looks like the sunshine’s here to stay http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/comment-page-1/#comment-338 ᛏᚦ » Blog Archive » And it looks like the sunshine’s here to stay Mon, 31 Mar 2008 03:40:10 +0000 http://blogs.gnome.org/metacity/2008/03/31/zenity/#comment-338 [...] Should we replace metacity-dialog with zenity? [...] [...] Should we replace metacity-dialog with zenity? [...]

]]>