Re: app wrappers and gworkspace

[Raffael Herzog]

On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 17:48:50 +0100, Jonathan Shipley <jon@windj.ath.cx>  
wrote:

> This is a very good start, which will certainly help the current
> situation. And talk about fast.

Well, it was just a proof of concept. ;) The release will probably not  
contain this feature.


> I have some user-related questions, though.
>
> 1) Can the 'virtual' gnustep apps created be kept in sync with the
>    distro's package system (/usr/share/applications/*.dektop) so that if
>    the user adds or removes a package the wrappers will automatically
>    adjust to the new situation? Could this step of GNUstep-ising
>    existing applications be done virtually when GNUstep firsts loads?

That's why I thought of using enabling GSWrapper for StepTalk. Like this,  
creating wrappers could be scripted and run e.g. on each login. Another  
thing I'm thinking about is splitting GSWrapper into a library for  
handling wrappers and the GUI itself and then create an additional command  
line tool that allows manipulating wrappers from within shell scripts.

But currently, no automation is planned, I'd like to get that thing  
running first as it is now. This means, that GSWrapper is currently  
nothing more than a graphical editor to create wrappers that comply to a  
defined layout and that are able to communicate with GWorkspace properly.


>    I really don't see the need for 'wrappers' for most of the system -  
> but
>    useful for user customisations in ~/GNUstep perhaps (see my last
>    point).  Could you explain why app-wrappers are actually needed?

Well, I don't like the way (user) applications are organised in UNIX and I  
hate menus, especially start menus. I really think this concept is  
completely broken.

I'd like to organise my Wrappers under ~/GNUstep/Applications in  
subdirectories, I'd like to put the ones I often use in the tabbed shelf,  
etc. That's why wrappers are IMHO the best solution. Of course, I could  
think of integrating this functionallity into GWorkspace or whatever, as  
long as in the end I've got e.g. a Gimp.app which I can move around,  
double-click to start etc. I just want something I can touch. :)

Wrappers are needed if you want to keep the NeXTish/Macish feel of  
handling applications (which I do want to keep).


> 2) Can wrappers for apps that don't exist be ignored so that users are
>    not presented with unachievable options: e.g. opening files with
>    non-existant apps, as currently happens?  Perhaps this issue goes
>    away if app-wrappers aren't pre-configured.  The interface must
>    provide only reasonable choices if you want users to come on board.

This could be done by a synchronization script, however, it could be a bit  
dangerous: If you just delete wrappers, the scripts in there, which may  
contain customisations, are lost. But moving wrappers for non-existing  
applications to a directory where GNUstep doesn't see them could be an  
option.


> 3) Is there a way with the app-wrappers system for users to make their
>    own customisations in their home directory?  I can think of uses for
>    this, but the one time I tried to do this it didn't work.

GSWrapper currently actually creates three scripts:

1. Start the application
2. Start the application and open one or more files
3. Open one or more files in an already running application

You're free what you write in those scripts, GSWrapper just inserts some  
very basic templates, and the proof of concept to use the informations in  
.desktop files to create the scripts has been done. I actually wrapped  
several Java applications (they almost always require some scripting to  
start) directly from within GSWrapper. You can also set the interpreter to  
be used for running the script, so if you're crazy and want to write a  
complex wrapper with a 1000 line Python script, go ahead. ;)

An application wrapped by GSWrapper is actually a GNUstep application like  
any other GNUstep app. The difference is just that it doesn't do anything  
itself, it just sits there waiting for requests from other applications,  
running the appropriate scripts when these requests arrive and exiting  
properly when the UNIX application exits.


> Perhaps I am just showing my ignorance of GNUstep here, so I hope you
> can all bear with me.

Well, GNUstep organises Application in a completely different way than KDE  
and GNOME do -- a nicer way, IMHO. In GNUstep, an application is actually  
a directory containing all the resources the application needs. So,  
instead of spreading apps all over the file system, everything that  
belongs to an app is packaged in one single place. This makes moving them  
around or also installing them very easy. Actually, it's just like in the  
good old Macintosh days: Install an application by simply copying a single  
"file" (actually a bundle) to your hard drive.


cu,
   Raffi, unfortunately probably not ready for a release this week-end

--
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is no  
difference, but in practice, there is.