Swfdec - May 2008 - [PATCH] Manage host based autoplaying from plugin menu

Hi,

attached a patch that provides the ability to set / unset autoplaying
from the domain the flash come from within the plugin menu. This patch
does not touch the actual logic of setting autoplay automatically on
play start. Hope this is acceptable for inclusion.

There is only a nitpick, the checkbox of the autoplaying is not updated
once the playing is toggled.

I've tried to tackle that problem creating a structure that contains
both the player and the autoplay item and passing them in the
callback function but i'm having problems with types: GtkWidget vs
GtkCheckMenuItem in gtk_check_menu_item_set_active () first parameter.
I'm attaching the same patch above plus these bits too if anybody can
shed some light.

thanks,
riccardo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: manage-autoplay-host-list-from-plugin-menu.diff
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 2933 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/swfdec/attachments/20080502/db1485ac/attachment.diff
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: experimental-manage-autoplay-host-list-from-plugin-menu.diff
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 4614 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/swfdec/attachments/20080502/db1485ac/attachment-0001.diff

On Fri, 2008-05-02 at 21:19 +0200, Riccardo Magliocchetti
wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> attached a patch that provides the ability to set / unset autoplaying
> from the domain the flash come from within the plugin menu. This patch
> does not touch the actual logic of setting autoplay automatically on
> play start. Hope this is acceptable for inclusion.
Actually, that's a bug in my opinion.  Even though swfdec is a GNOME
project, and GNOME is notorious for applying configuration changes
immediately, this goes too far.  The plugin area is not a configuration
dialog.  It's a player.  Users don't expect their actions to be
remembered.

I think everybody agrees that the current implementation is wrong.  We
shouldn't be trying to preserve a wrong behavior.

I think your previous patch was better.

-- 
Regards,
Pavel Roskin