GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 336731
Switcher of number desktops is very fast
Last modified: 2007-02-21 20:17:30 UTC
That bug has been opened on https://launchpad.net/distros/ubuntu/+bug/36529 "Switcher of number desktops is very fast. http://librarian.launchpad.net/1836952/PrepinacPloch.png Screenshot"
The one above it is too... Also - I'm sure this happens in many other places around GNOME...
Sebastien: so, does it happen with all what-is-the-name-of-this-widget widgets in the whole GNOME desktop? If yes, then I'm not sure that it's here that we should fix it.
What I think the bug is referring to is that the what-is-the-name-of-this-widget widget perhaps shouldn't be used in this case, when what is needed is a discrete number of workspaces - 1,2,3,4,5,6. Does anyone use more than say 8? Perhaps the widgets should just stop increasing after that? Maybe even 6? People that are 1337 enough to handle more than 6 workspaces are probably able to open up gconf and set a manual key...
Vincent, you can set the increment step for the GtkSpinButton widget. It's probably going at this speed by default, but it you range is 500 it can be faster than on a small number of desktops no? :) We could discuss if the default increment should be smaller from GTK though, depending of what we consider as the frequent usecase for it ...
I can confirm this bug on Ubuntu 6.06 LTS Dapper Drake (GNOME 2.14.x) and Ubuntu 6.10 Edgy Eft (GNOME 2.16.x). Please fix it.
Created attachment 79592 [details] [review] Patch Here is a patch for this. With some testing, I figured out that 0.2 was a reasonable increment value in this case.
Manu: Thanks! Sergej: well, I still consider the spin button useful since it helps indicating it's a number that's expected and I'm sure user are using it.
With that change one click is not enough to change the number of workspace which is pretty confusing. Ubuntu bug about that: https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-panel/+bug/83334. Is there a way to have the use a 1 step and slow down the acceleration?
Sebastien: I put another fix, which should better. And I opened bug 410520 to have GTK+ more helpful here.