Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:06:04 +0100, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> > The other thing that needs to be done differently is that the
> > WS_EX_TRAYWINDOW flag has to go, that's not Windows compatible. We
> > need to define an appropriate interface that doesn't i
On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 19:06:04 +0100, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> The other thing that needs to be done differently is that the
> WS_EX_TRAYWINDOW flag has to go, that's not Windows compatible. We
> need to define an appropriate interface that doesn't involve
> overloading Win32 flags.
OK, would an
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's a bit vague, how should it be done? I also don't understand why
> the XEMBED code has to be split off, that's the standard way to dock
> tray icons in all modern desktops. If we don't dock the icons, what
> else can we do with them?
The code has to
On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 06:10:50PM +0100, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> I'm still hoping to see a version that doesn't include the xembed
> stuff, this will have to be done differently anyway.
That's a bit vague, how should it be done? I also don't understand why
the XEMBED code has to be split off
Mike Hearn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:58:07 +, Mike Hearn wrote:
> > - Use freedesktop.org system tray protocol, remove legacy KDE support
> > - Introduce new Explorer process
> > - Rewrite system tray handling to be out of process
>
> Hi Alexandre,
>
> What needs d
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:58:07 +, Mike Hearn wrote:
> - Use freedesktop.org system tray protocol, remove legacy KDE support
> - Introduce new Explorer process
> - Rewrite system tray handling to be out of process
Hi Alexandre,
What needs doing next for this patch?
thanks -mike
