Hi, currently, all sorting order of the core and core plugin options inside the metadata files is based on the order they are listed in the C source files. Unfortunately, that's not optimal for automatic settings manager GUI generation. DO you think it's ok to sort them by functional groups? This would have the advantage of settings managers being aware of the functional grouping, which would help a lot in creating them. I have attached a patch which re-sorts the core options a bit to reflect that - what do you think about it? Is this change ok to go in? Regards, Danny -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: core-option-sort.diff Type: text/x-patch Size: 4176 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/compiz/attachments/20070613/bd76967b/attachment.bin
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 16:48 +0200, Danny Baumann wrote:> Hi, > > currently, all sorting order of the core and core plugin options inside > the metadata files is based on the order they are listed in the C source > files. Unfortunately, that's not optimal for automatic settings manager > GUI generation. > > DO you think it's ok to sort them by functional groups? This would have > the advantage of settings managers being aware of the functional > grouping, which would help a lot in creating them. > > I have attached a patch which re-sorts the core options a bit to reflect > that - what do you think about it? Is this change ok to go in?A function attribute or function element should be added to the option element if functional groups are desirable. -David