> Yes, we probably are, but actually it is not such a big amout of code > as it can seem because as for the *config* tool, which is the > significantly bigger > part of the code, I'm sticking with using nm-c-e run as separate app > - same as > g-c-c does ([Configure] button). The g-c-c itself is more of *control* tool > and that is the part we are duplicating (and potentially drifting away from) > in the spoke. It is quite minimal set of UI elements to control networking > (list of devices/connections, status info, turn on/off, select wireless AP). > Also we want to do some things differently from g-c-c, like allow to > configure > devices which are not active > (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=704119) Yeah, I understand and I think what you've done is most likely the best approach. I think splitting it up like you've done is good. It's still a fair bit of UI code, though, and I know we're going to drift. But if that's the way it's got to be, there's no use complaining about it. - Chris _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
