forwarded 474997 http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=171804 thanks
On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 21:52 +0100, Tim Cutts wrote: > Wow - that's beyond the call of duty. :-) "Interesting" user > interface, n'est ce pas? Quirky, but actually damned good at what it > does once you're used to it. No problem, it's always fun to try something new, and acedb was certainly something special :) > > Just to make sure I don't misunderstand anything; You would prefer > > it if > > there were two groups, one for each xace process? Alternatively, it > > would be better if the group didn't sort the names alphabetically, > > instead making it clear which windows belonged to which process? > > Either of those solutions would be acceptable to my user I think. The > first one is what the documentation appears to say it's supposed to > do. I realise that this could be hard to do, because it would > probably do nasty things to e.g. terminal windows, depending on > whether the terminal window was opened by starting a fresh copy of > terminal, or using Ctrl+Shift+N. The second one is probably easier to > do without incurring nasty behaviour for other applications. I > suppose it could always be an additional configuration option... Good, then I understood you correctly. The second solution has actually been suggested before, in an upstream bug (the one I have marked the bug as forwarded to). I suggest you add a comment to the bug, describe your use-case with acedb and ask if anyone is working on it at the moment. There's also a second upstream bug which might be of interest. This one is about making it possible to have user created groups; http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362706 -- Cheers, Sven Arvidsson http://www.whiz.se PGP Key ID 760BDD22
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
