On Fri, May 25, 2007 at 05:25:14PM +0200, gg@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > If everything ends up "dockable" and there is no longer the freedom to > place windows where you _need_ then to be > I think it should stay as it is. Maybe that was the fundemental reason for > this rather unusual set up in the first place. I talked about dockable, not forcing things to be docked. The only necessary restriction of placement of floating palette windows would be palette headers right above docking areas (as that should trigger docking). I'm confident this could be arranged to be no issue in actual use. Actually, if you think about it, docking would happen when you move a palette close to the bottom or side of another palette, so the then docked pallette ends up pretty much where you move it to, but tightly arranged, most space efficient. Or if you moved it on top of another palette, you get a tab and can easily switch to what would be completely obscured otherwise. > I know this sort of thing is possible in win32 API but I dont seem to be > able to find any linux progs, gtk+ or qt derived, that have freely > floating windows or panels. So what if GIMP became the first? -- Thorsten Wilms Thorwil's Design for Free Software: http://thorwil.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
