I created an alias to launch sublime X from bash on OSX, and it seems to try to open the file, but always complains that is can't open the file format.
BTW, I was looking for where session information is stored along with packages, but can't seem to find anything. I would assume they would go into ~/.sublimetextx or something similar? That is what most other editors/apps do configuration data on unixy systems.
Overall though, things are looking good. Glad to see the start of the QuickPanel!
The dot files are common on Linux/Unix. Although MacOSX is indeed a Unix system underneath, configuration files are usually stored somewhere in ~/Library or ~/Library/Application Data. That is for user settings. For all users you would follow /Library or /Library/Application Data. It is similar but still different enough. For unix application ports the normal "dot" files are used (i.e. vim, emacs etc.), so in reality it is a mixture of both.
I see that in ~/Library/Application Support/Sublime Text X/Packages/Default/Options there are the following files:
Default File Type.sublime-options Linux File Type.sublime-options MacOSX File Type.sublime-options
In the first file it is mentioned that the user should create the file User File Type.sublime-options to override the default values (which is the default behavior until SublimeText 1.4) I tried that on MacOSX but it does not seem to override the values in MacOSX File Type.sublime-options (i.e. in its current state only the font) Jon, should this be that way? Meaning that the same way that Default File Type.sublime-options will be ovewritten in a software update, I guess that the same will happen for the OS specific ones. So changing the options on the Mac specific options file will be valid until the next update.
sublimator wrote:Can we have complete control over the bindings precedence in Sublime X? ZenCoding bindings, by virtue of Z > G, overriding my G)enshi snippets is a little frustrating.
I'll be focusing on getting the key binding system up to speed in next weeks release, and I'll get that sorted at the same time. Not quite sure what form it'll take, but perhaps just the ability to specify a priority number per-package, and sorting on that in preference to the package name.