[Sugar-devel] [PATCH sugar v2] Add Control Panel for proxy settings

[Simon Schampijer]

On 01/30/2012 02:32 PM, Sascha Silbe wrote:
> Excerpts from Simon Schampijer's message of 2012-01-30 12:56:57 +0100:
>
>> Following the recommendations in [1] I have been applying a workaround
>> in GTK2 to get a better wrapping for the labels *.
>
> I was about to ask whether we really need that complicated approach as
> we don't change the layout dynamically. However, after some experiments,
> it turns out there's no easier way, though I consider that a bug.
> Namely, once you enable line wrapping using label.set_line_wrap(True),
> the label no longer fills the entire horizontal space allocated to the
> label by its parent with text (though it does _align_ within this space,
> respecting label.set_alignment()). If you don't enable line wrapping,
> the label will use all the allocated horizontal space to display the
> text, but cut it off (as expected).
>
>
> For the proxy settings this worked well enough because the text size
> matched the fixed default size of the label reasonably well on all of
> the systems I tested with.
>
>
>> This leads to the following control panel [2] (much better than [3]).
>> So adding the option will show the 'main'-section on an XO without
>> scrolling, reducing the 'we need an extra section because of
>> scrolling' argument to a minimum, scrolling should only be needed when
>> there is a non-None proxy [4].
>
> While configuring the proxy still requires scrolling, at least one would
> be able to see that there's something to configure, i.e. the
> discoverability concern would be addressed. It's by a rather tight
> margin, though. On what systems did you test? I'm worried it might just
> "fall off" the screen on tighter setups (smaller screen or larger font
> size). Especially if the scrolled area is barely larger than the screen,
> the scrollbar blends into the surroundings a bit too well.
>
> Sascha

I am testing with the XO config (-d 200 -i 1200x900 in sugar-jhbuild), 
here are the screen-shots from modeling the GNOME3 network-proxy section.

I think it is definitely an acceptable result, no need to have an extra 
section.

Regards,
    Simon

[1] http://dev.laptop.org/~erikos/designs/new_proxy_none.png
[2] http://dev.laptop.org/~erikos/designs/new_proxy_manual.png
[3] http://dev.laptop.org/~erikos/designs/new_proxy_automatic.png