On Wed, 19 May 2010 23:15:40 +0200
Enrico Tröger <
enrico.troeger@uvena.de> wrote:
> > Each Geany is restored exactly it was before the session was closed,
> > including open files, options (including applied but unsaved),
> > per-document options (even if no project file is open) etc.
> >
>
> Now we have two alternating SM implementations? Why?
Because I wanted the Geany-s state to be restored more precisely. The
only way to do that were separate .conf files, which eliminates the race
condition as well.
Also, the alternate implementation doesn't require a --project option
- using argv[1] is the easiest wat to open a geany project file from
the file manager.
> I think I still like something close to the current behaviour: the
> main instance (i.e. the first opened one) is master over the config
> file.
This behaviour is still in the future. Unless I'm missing something,
if you start geany twice with different sockets, there will be two
"main" instances using the same configuration file.
Eugene's original implementation requires main/secondary instances;
this one does not.
> I guess the main problem here is that Geany was never designed to be
> used as multiple window editor, and IMO it shouldn't be changed to be
> one.
Indeed, so I save each Geany completely separately. Since this is
more compliant with the current (as in "currently implemented")
behaviour, it's also ~1/3 shorter.
Maybe I missed something, but what happens to configuration under this plan when instances are manually closed and re-opened?
Which of the .conf files is used when the first is manually opened, the second is manually opened etc.
Cheers
Lex