Re: [Epiphany] Re: Security prompt dialogs

[Marco Pesenti Gritti <marco gnome org>]

On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 15:47, Christopher James Lahey wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 19:53, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> > A clean global api is obviously the solution. Do you really think it's
> > sane to require every hig compliant app to have custom prompt classes ?!
> > Manual fixup take some more time but it's much easier to get rid of it
> > later. Once you have an helper it's a pain (most likely == rewrite). I
> > really dont think you want to have your own hig alert when gtk will have
> > one.
> 
> I really don't understand how manual fixup is any easier.  If you use a
> helper class, especially if the api is just a sed job from what the
> eventual helper class is going to be, the fixup is easy, whereas if you
> do it manually, you have to go through and change every instance where
> you use a dialog.
> 

Manually fixup is basically an addition work. You have to change some
borders, so you just do set_border. Removing this when border will be
right is dead easy.
If you write a new api you change the whole logic of dialog creation. I
think galeon helper has something like set_primary_text,
set_secondary_text.
Assuming gtk api will remain the same this has no mapping with that api,
and getting dialogs back to use gtk api is more or less like rewriting.

Obviously as you say the fixup is easy if it's just (or mostly) a sed
job, but that's exactly my point.
The only way to ensure it will be a sed job is getting an api in egg or
something similar (if current messagebox api is enough, which I doubt,
you could just make an higgy implementation with a different namespace).
If you dont ensure your api make sense also for other applications and
that it will be possible to adopt it as a global solution, you will have
to go and rewrite all the instance of dialogs later.

Marco