Expose allDesktops option from rc.xml in the desktop section #253
Conversation
|
|
||
| void MainDialog::on_all_desktops_toggled(bool checked) { | ||
| tree_set_bool(all_desktops_node_1, checked); | ||
| tree_set_bool(all_desktops_node_2, checked); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I realise it's a little bit suboptimal having 2 calls to tree_apply() via these functions, maybe another function to avoid that is merited
| static int num_desktops; | ||
|
|
||
| static const gchar* all_desktops_node_1 = "keyboard/keybind:key=A-Tab/action:name=NextWindow/allDesktops"; | ||
| static const gchar* all_desktops_node_2 = "keyboard/keybind:key=A-S-Tab/action:name=PreviousWindow/allDesktops"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These long names are a bit ungainly and potentially fragile because of where the allDesktops entries are nested in the xml.
Ideally (IMO) allDesktops would be broken out of the keybinds to some more convenient and stable location, as the behaviour seems independent of them to me, but Openbox seems to be mature and unchanged for a long time so I guess that's unlikely to happen. Doubtless there are a lot of programs out there using the current configurations that any change would break.
Could maybe do something a bit more comprehensive here, like search the keybinds to see which ones have <action name="[Next|Previous]Window"> or allDesktops and fill into a template string such as "keyboard/keybind:key=%s/action:name=%s/allDesktops" with ``g_strdup_printf`. Just means a bit more processing and code, and i'm conscious of introducing bugs.
|
Quick clip of it in action
|
|
Thanks, it looks working fine here both on my user and on my testuser. It looks like Lubuntu will base its Wayland session on labwc in future:
|
2 participants
See issue #252
Some UX and technical aspects complicate things. The "allDesktops" option is fairly buried in the keybindings in the xml, hence the strings for the node names. I guess there's potential for something to break if some other program is used for remapping those.
There seems to be a tension between the separation of concerns between the window manager and desktop environment. Also, whether this belongs in the "Desktops" section of obconf-qt, the "Windows" section, or a separate section, I'm not altogther sure.