Hi all,
As some of you may know, my Summer of Code project is working on control panel support for Wine, and writing some new control panels. Part of my plan was also to split bits of winecfg into their own control panels, specifically, the Appearance section of the Desktop tab, and the Sound tab. Now, I realise people will have got quite used to winecfg working the way it does, so I'm wondering what people will think of this, or if it's better to leave winecfg alone. Due to lots of shared utility functions in winecfg, I've currently implemented a bit of code, similar to that submitted by pure_evil @ mail.bg some months ago, which enables winecfg to be executed with a combination of parameters to display a combination of tabs (see http://tinyurl.com/5yua77), as opposed to physically moving the code into a separate file. winecfg would then be called by a .cpl file to display the appropriate tabs. The default setting for winecfg, then, would be to display all tabs except for the Desktop and Sound tabs, which would be accessible as separate icons in the control panel.
What do people think of this? I can imagine there may be a bit of resistance, so I figured it'd be best to ask now, before I do any more work on it. ;-) My intention for the rest of my project is also to working on assorted other control panels, however, which don't overlap with winecfg's functionality!
Cheers,
On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Owen Rudge owen@owenrudge.net wrote:
Hi all,
As some of you may know, my Summer of Code project is working on control panel support for Wine, and writing some new control panels. Part of my plan was also to split bits of winecfg into their own control panels, specifically, the Appearance section of the Desktop tab, and the Sound tab. Now, I realise people will have got quite used to winecfg working the way it does, so I'm wondering what people will think of this, or if it's better to leave winecfg alone. Due to lots of shared utility functions in winecfg, I've currently implemented a bit of code, similar to that submitted by pure_evil @ mail.bg some months ago, which enables winecfg to be executed with a combination of parameters to display a combination of tabs (see http://tinyurl.com/5yua77), as opposed to physically moving the code into a separate file. winecfg would then be called by a .cpl file to display the appropriate tabs. The default setting for winecfg, then, would be to display all tabs except for the Desktop and Sound tabs, which would be accessible as separate icons in the control panel.
What do people think of this? I can imagine there may be a bit of resistance, so I figured it'd be best to ask now, before I do any more work on it. ;-) My intention for the rest of my project is also to working on assorted other control panels, however, which don't overlap with winecfg's functionality!
Cheers,
-- Owen Rudge http://www.owenrudge.net/
Since sound is accessed relatively frequently, I'd say leave it in winecfg, or have an easy way to access it from there (maybe add a tab on winecfg that launches the control panel?). Desktop integration is in a poor state, so moving it would probably be fine.
Just my $.02 - Austin
Owen Rudge wrote:
Hi all,
As some of you may know, my Summer of Code project is working on control panel support for Wine, and writing some new control panels. Part of my plan was also to split bits of winecfg into their own control panels, specifically, the Appearance section of the Desktop tab, and the Sound tab. Now, I realise people will have got quite used to winecfg working the way it does, so I'm wondering what people will think of this, or if it's better to leave winecfg alone. Due to lots of shared utility functions in winecfg, I've currently implemented a bit of code, similar to that submitted by pure_evil @ mail.bg some months ago, which enables winecfg to be executed with a combination of parameters to display a combination of tabs (see http://tinyurl.com/5yua77), as opposed to physically moving the code into a separate file. winecfg would then be called by a .cpl file to display the appropriate tabs. The default setting for winecfg, then, would be to display all tabs except for the Desktop and Sound tabs, which would be accessible as separate icons in the control panel.
What do people think of this? I can imagine there may be a bit of resistance, so I figured it'd be best to ask now, before I do any more work on it. ;-) My intention for the rest of my project is also to working on assorted other control panels, however, which don't overlap with winecfg's functionality!
Cheers,
The biggest reason your patch was not accepted is because you can not separate most of the settings from application tab. This makes it useless to put only separate tabs into control panel applets.
What will be useful, is rewriting winecfg without using property sheet control. It dramatically limits what you can do in the winecfg interface and is a huge hindrance.
Vitaliy.
The biggest reason your patch was not accepted is because you can not
separate most of the settings from application tab. This makes it useless to put only separate tabs into
control panel applets.
You're perhaps confusing pure_evil's patch with my proposal. My proposal would only split up the tabs that are not application-specific, which are the Desktop Appearance and Sound portions. These would become accessible through standard control panels, with the rest of the tabs remaining in winecfg normally.
Regards,
-
Austin English -
Owen Rudge -
Vitaliy Margolen