Le mardi 18 mars 2008, Junio C Hamano a écrit : > Christian Couder <chriscool@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > This makes it possible to use different version of the tools > > than the one on the current PATH, or maybe a custom script. > > > > In this patch we also try to launch "konqueror" using > > "kfmclient" even if a path to a konqueror binary is given > > in "man.konqueror.path". > > It may be true that allowing customizable paths may be more useful than > not allowing them, so I do not have fundamental objection to this > enhancement. However, I doubt this s/konqueror/kfmclient/ is a good > idea. > > As a general rule, if you allow the user to explicitly say "instead of > what you would normally use, use _this_", you should not try to outsmart > the user by using something else that you derived from that "_this_" the > user gave you. > > If the user wants to use kfmclient, then the user can say so. Yes, but if the user just wants to use a konq that is not in the path, then the konq specified with "man.konqueror.path" should behave the same as when using the konq in the path. That means that we should also try to open a new tab on an existing konq, and this will not be the case if we use "/path/konqueror URL" instead of "/path/kfmclient newTab URL". > If the > user wants to really launch konq instead of using kfmclient for whatever > reason, the outsmarting code will interfere and make it impossible. I think it will still be possible using custom commands. I am working on the patch. It should be ready in a few days. Thanks, Christian. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
