|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > January 2007 > Bugs in default GNOME etch?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Bugs in default GNOME etch?
|
|
| Luca Capello 2007-01-16, 1:31 am |
| | |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-16, 7:25 am |
| Le mardi 16 janvier 2007 =E0 02:46 +0100, Luca Capello a =E9crit :
> Is there a practical reason for requesting xpm icons? No need to
> explain if an answer already exists, but I cannot find it.
This is because some menu systems don't understand other formats.
> 4) evince doesn't appear by default on the GNOME Applications list (it
> happened on three different installations). Maybe it's not the
> only one, but I cannot find any others.
IIRC this is intentional, as evince is a viewer that should only invoked
from programs that have something to view (nautilus, epiphany,
evolution...)
> 6) gnome-panel gives an .xsession-errors because "Unable to open
> desktop file epiphany.desktop for panel launcher". This is normal
> as epiphany isn't installed by default, but I'd suggest to install
> the firefox.desktop instead.
Epiphany is not installed by default? If this is the case, I consider it
a very important bug in debian-installer.
Looking at the gnome-desktop task, it installs gnome-desktop-environment
and firefox-gnome-support. Besides, gnome-desktop-environment depends on
epiphany-browser | gnome-www-browser, the latter being provided by
firefox-gnome-support. In this case, I don't know what aptitude does,
but if epiphany doesn't get installed in the end this is *wrong*. The
GNOME desktop as a whole is configured to use epiphany, which has decent
desktop integration, which firefox/iceweasel has not.
Can anyone in debian-boot confirm that the aptitude behaviour leads to
epiphany not being installed? If this the case, what solution would you
suggest? (The obvious solution of not installing the ugly
firefox/iceweasel and confusing users with two browsers having been
repeatedly refused by the d-i team.)
> 7) why still Gnomemeeting by default instead of Ekiga (which AFAIK is
> the default VoIP client since GNOME 2.14)?
This should be fixed in meta-gnome2 1:2.14.3.5.
--=20
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-16, 7:25 am |
| Le mardi 16 janvier 2007 =C3=A0 11:22 +0200, Eddy Petri=C8=99or a =C3=A9cri=
t :
t[vbcol=seagreen]
>=20
> Hmm, AFAIR, it wasn't two weeks ago, and I thought *this* was intentional=
and was happy about it.
On our side, it is not. We have spent efforts in providing an integrated
environment, and this includes epiphany as the default browser, not a
half-assed browser designed for Windows and customised with GNOME
colors.
Until recently, d-i was installing both epiphany and firefox, the reason
being "Windows users know firefox". If epiphany doesn't get installed
anymore, this is making things even worse. And now that we have moved to
iceweasel, the Windows argument doesn't hold anymore.
--=20
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt 2007-01-16, 7:25 am |
| | |
| Eddy Petrișor 2007-01-16, 7:25 am |
| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Josselin Mouette wrote:
>
> Epiphany is not installed by default? If this is the case, I consider it
> a very important bug in debian-installer.
Hmm, AFAIR, it wasn't two weeks ago, and I thought *this* was intentional and was happy about it.
> Looking at the gnome-desktop task, it installs gnome-desktop-environment
> and firefox-gnome-support. Besides, gnome-desktop-environment depends on
> epiphany-browser | gnome-www-browser, the latter being provided by
> firefox-gnome-support. In this case, I don't know what aptitude does,
> but if epiphany doesn't get installed in the end this is *wrong*. The
> GNOME desktop as a whole is configured to use epiphany, which has decent
> desktop integration, which firefox/iceweasel has not.
>
> Can anyone in debian-boot confirm that the aptitude behaviour leads to
> epiphany not being installed? If this the case, what solution would you
> suggest? (The obvious solution of not installing the ugly
> firefox/iceweasel and confusing users with two browsers having been
> repeatedly refused by the d-i team.)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFrJliY8Chqv3NRNoRAqn/AJ9tTzxLRGo24su5MnUSMdsDccuWdwCfbsl3
UA/BSmPJpe0PxNfDw/9ZBJc=
=i7Eo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Loïc Minier 2007-01-16, 7:25 am |
| Hi,
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007, Luca Capello wrote:
> first of all, I posted to d-d because I think the problem is not
> restricted to GNOME, but if I'm wrong, please continue this discussion
> to debian-gtk-gnome (which I cc:ed) and cc: me please (not needed for
> d-d, I read it).
Indeed, not only GNOME is concerned, but bug reports are often
reassigned when needs be, so next time you discover some issues you may
want to fill them directly as you discover them in the BTS. However,
there's some room for discussion for the class of bugs you are
reporting here.
> 1) some entries in the Debian menu lack the icon
> 2) the Debian menu requires xpm icons [2] and in fact only 4 packages
> have icons in the png format (ekiga, evince, gimp, gnomemeeting),
> but for some packages the xpm icon is really bad
> 3) there are different icons for the same entry in the GNOME
> Applications list and the Debian menu
These issues are connected; what you describe is a general problem I
have with the Debian menu: its XPM requirement and its duplication of
the menu entries makes it a maintenance burden.
I can imagine technical solutions to these problems, such as a) making
XPM optional and automatically generating it when it's not available
(yes, this might result in an ugly icon in some cases, but at least we
will have an ugly icon vaguely ressembling the icon, and it might also
result in nicer icons for PNG capable menu displays), b) using the
.desktop files upstream provides to automatically register entries in
the Debian menu (Note that the inverse process exists in menu-xdg  .
Without this, Debian menu support in Debian packages will always lag
behind as upstream updates its .desktop files, icons etc. or
adds/remove programs.
Another personal problem I have with the Debian menu is that it's
slightly cluttered with entries useless to me, and it's also of no use
along of the GNOME menu under GNOME. This doesn't motivate me (and I
expect other people) to fix it.
So, basically, I think Debian menu support for GNOME apps is very low
priority, and would have deeper problems to solve first.
> 4) evince doesn't appear by default on the GNOME Applications list (it
> happened on three different installations). Maybe it's not the
> only one, but I cannot find any others.
This is on purpose, the .desktop file has "NoDisplay=true" because it
is expected that you never need to launch evince, but you simply open
documents from nautilus or your browser and this spawns evince. This
is to not clutter the GNOME menu.
(So, not a bug, a feature.)
> 5) some programs aren't present in the Debian menu:
> alacarte, gnome-btdownload
No idea about these. You're welcome to file bugs if it makes sense to
have them in the menu.
> 6) gnome-panel gives an .xsession-errors because "Unable to open
> desktop file epiphany.desktop for panel launcher". This is normal
> as epiphany isn't installed by default, but I'd suggest to install
> the firefox.desktop instead.
I did not see the discussion which lead to the choice of iceweasel as
the default browser, and I think it would have been a worthwhile
discussion to make publicly.
This appears to be Ubuntu's choice as well, but I think the arguments
brought up back then in the Ubuntu discussion don't apply anymore or
don't apply to Debian (Epiphany is now as usable as IceWeasel is, and
the name "Firefox" is not an argument anymore for Debian).
I suppose what you're seeing is the result of a discrepancy between the
default panel layout offered in the gnome-panel package and the
installed packages.
Perhaps this matter should be discussed on the debian-desktop@ list, at
least I wish we would have a strong Debian Desktop decision-taking
body so we could share ideas and goals and march in the same direction.
Feel free to file a bug against either tasksel or gnome-panel depending
on whether you would like to see iceweasel or epiphany on the default
desktop.
> 7) why still Gnomemeeting by default instead of Ekiga (which AFAIK is
> the default VoIP client since GNOME 2.14)?
This is fixed in the gnome-desktop-environment package, but did not
migrate to testing yet, will happen in a couple of days.
> 8) the gnomebaker window doesn't start big enough to include all the
> buttons (this is clearly a bug, which strangely hasn't been
> reported yet).
Completely unrelated, please see with the gnomebaker package's BTS /
maintainer.
Bye,
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Tim Dijkstra 2007-01-16, 7:25 am |
| On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:46:45 +0100
Marc 'HE' Brockschmidt <he@ftwca.de> wrote:
> Luca Capello <luca@pca.it> writes:
>
> To be fair, the .png icon referenced by the evince menu file doesn't
> exist...
>
>
> That is intentional, as evince is not intended to be invoked
> directly. Other applications (such as browsers, nautilus) can and will
> open files in evince when the user is trying to see a
> PDF/PS/DjVu/DVI/... file.
That is a bogus argument. Why shouldn't I want to fire up evince when I
know I have a pdf/ps/etc file on disk I wan't to read? It has a
normal 'open'-button...
grts
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Loïc Minier 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| On Tue, Jan 16, 2007, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> Why shouldn't I want to fire up evince when I
> know I have a pdf/ps/etc file on disk I wan't to read? It has a
> normal 'open'-button...
Sure, this is possible, and you can add a launcher for evince if you
really like, or edit your menu, or launch evince from the "Run command"
dialog, or from a terminal.
The presence in the menu has to be weighted against the cluttering.
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Joey Hess 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| Luca Capello wrote:
> 7) why still Gnomemeeting by default instead of Ekiga (which AFAIK is
> the default VoIP client since GNOME 2.14)?
This is fixed in gnome-desktop-environment 1:2.14.3.5, which is due to
reach etch in 2 days, assuming a freeze exception is requested and
granted for the new version.
--
see shy jo
| |
| Luca Capello 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| | |
| Luca Capello 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| Hello!
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 14:29:04 +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
>
> Sure, this is possible, and you can add a launcher for evince if you
> really like, or edit your menu, or launch evince from the "Run
> command" dialog, or from a terminal.
I think a bit of consistency should be used here:
- evince (a document *viewer*) is to be launched from Nautilus ->
no GNOME menu entry
- eog (an image *viewer*)should be the same IMHO ->
GNOME menu entry
> The presence in the menu has to be weighted against the cluttering.
If I search for a program, I go to the menu list, not on Nautilus
(obviously this is my personal behavior, which can surely be different
From a new user's one).
Moreover, a well-arranged menu is for sure not cluttered and we're
talking about one more entry, while OpenOffice.ord Draw is listed
twice (Graphics and Office) and the same for Gnomebaker (Accessories
and Sound&Video).
Just my 0.02€, I consider this situation as a very minor one, so I
don't bother more :-)
Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
| |
| Luca Capello 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| Hello!
NB, if you keep d-d as to: or cc:, please don't cc: me, I read the
list.
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:11:36 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 16 janvier 2007 Ã_ 02:46 +0100, Luca Capello a écrit :
>
> Epiphany is not installed by default? If this is the case, I consider it
> a very important bug in debian-installer.
[...]
> The GNOME desktop as a whole is configured to use epiphany, which
> has decent desktop integration, which firefox/iceweasel has not.
I was also surprised that epiphany wasn't installed by default.
To be sure this is a *bug* (now I consider it for the reason below), I
installed a Debin etch with KDE via the full CD image [1]. Indeed, on
KDE Konqueror is installed by default and it's the default browser
(i.e. the one present in the status bar). Thus, I don't understand
why Debian GNOME should rely on Iceweasel.
> Can anyone in debian-boot confirm that the aptitude behaviour leads to
> epiphany not being installed? If this the case, what solution would you
> suggest? (The obvious solution of not installing the ugly
> firefox/iceweasel and confusing users with two browsers having been
> repeatedly refused by the d-i team.)
I'd suggest both (i.e. DE's browser and Iceweasel), as it's the case
for Debian KDE. The user will have the epiphany icon on the GNOME
panel, but Iceweasel will still be available in the GNOME menu.
Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca
Footnotes:
[1] http://cdimage.debian.org/cdimage/w...86-kde-CD-1.iso
| |
| Loïc Minier 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| On Tue, Jan 16, 2007, Luca Capello wrote:
> - evince (a document *viewer*) is to be launched from Nautilus ->
> no GNOME menu entry
> - eog (an image *viewer*)should be the same IMHO ->
> GNOME menu entry
Yeah, well, the new policy isn't implemented in all programs; I don't
know whether this is implemented in eog's upstreeam tree already.
Basically the same remarks as yours are answered by upstream in this
upstream report:
<http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312399>
Just FYI, I *personally* would prefer an evince entry in the menu as
well, but I prefer keeping close to the usability policy defined by
upstream.
As I said, you're free to edit this to your test. I didn't test it,
but I suppose GNOME menu editors can switch evince.desktop to being
displayed again.
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Loïc Minier 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| On Tue, Jan 16, 2007, Luca Capello wrote:
> I know and in fact I wrote at point 1:
> some entries in the Debian menu lack the icon:
> evince, yelp, sound-juicer, gnome-cups-manager (both entries),
> ^^^^^^
> gnome-utils (gnome-screenshot), gucharmap, foomatic-gui,
> gnome-system-monitor, grdesktop, gsynaptics, ekiga
> Thus, evince Debian menu entry has two bugs: not an xpm icon and the
> actual png icon is missing (the latter more important IMHO).
Fixed in 0.4.0-5.
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Tim Dijkstra 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 17:03:15 +0100
Lo=C3=AFc Minier <lool+debian@via.ecp.fr> wrote:
> Just FYI, I *personally* would prefer an evince entry in the menu as
> well, but I prefer keeping close to the usability policy defined by
> upstream.
Well we shouldn't keep ourselves hostage of stupid upstream behaviour,
should we?
grts Tim
| |
| Tim Dijkstra 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 15:51:29 +0100
Luca Capello <luca@pca.it> wrote:
>
> If I search for a program, I go to the menu list, not on Nautilus
> (obviously this is my personal behavior, which can surely be different
> From a new user's one).
I don't know. I think 'traditionally' one always had to launch the
correct program from the menu, also on other OSs.
grts Tim
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Michael Banck 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:22:51PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 17:03:15 +0100
> Loïc Minier <lool+debian@via.ecp.fr> wrote:
>
> Well we shouldn't keep ourselves hostage of stupid upstream behaviour,
> should we?
Contrary to us, GNOME (in this case RedHat) actually employs usability
experts. Who are we to think we know better?
The relevant upstream bug is
http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=312399
if you want to have more information about this.
I suggest to move this thread back to debian-gtk-gnome.
Michael
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Julien Cristau 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 18:55:32 +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> PS: My vote for default GNOME browser definitely goes to Epiphany;
> Firefox^WIceweasel comes nowhere close to feeling like a real GNOME
> application.
>
http://lists.debian.org/debian-deve...1/msg00952.html
Cheers,
Julien
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| David Weinehall 2007-01-16, 1:19 pm |
| On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 10:48:03AM +0100, Loïc Minier wrote:
[snip]
>
> No idea about these. You're welcome to file bugs if it makes sense to
> have them in the menu.
gnome-btdownload:
"A simple Gnome interface designed as a mime-sink for BitTorrent files.
gnome-btdownload allow a user to download files using bittorrent,
a scatter-gather network.
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| Le mardi 16 janvier 2007 à 18:59 +0100, Julien Cristau a écrit :
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 18:55:32 +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-deve...1/msg00952.html
Wow, that was fast. Thanks, Joey. You even added epiphany-extensions
before I had a chance to ask for it
--
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Ross Burton 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 18:55 +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> alacarte:
>
> "Alacarte is an easy-to-use menu editor for GNOME that can add
> and edit new entries and menus. It works with the freedesktop.org
> menu specification and should work with any desktop environment
> that uses the spec."
>
> Presumably people that want to edit their menus can launch this
> application using the launcher. It's not really the average
> everyday tool...
Isn't this invoked from right clicking on Applications?
Ross
--
Ross Burton mail: ross@burtonini.com
jabber: ross@burtonini.com
www: http://www.burtonini.com./
PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF
| |
| Sven Arvidsson 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 18:44 +0000, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 18:55 +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
>
> Isn't this invoked from right clicking on Applications?
It is if you are running gnome-panel 2.16, but not in 2.14 (Etch) I
think.
Anyway, I think the original poster complained about the lack of a menu
entry for Alacarte in the Debian menu system.
--
Cheers,
Sven Arvidsson
http://www.whiz.se
PGP Key ID 760BDD22
| |
| Tim Dijkstra 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 17:55:53 +0100
Michael Banck <mbanck@debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:22:51PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
>=20
> Contrary to us, GNOME (in this case RedHat) actually employs usability
> experts. Who are we to think we know better?
You'll see that these so-called experts will be arguing next that
you're not supposed to launch it from a terminal and will move it from
the standard $PATH to /usr/lib/gnome or something....
grrr
Tim
| |
| Hendrik Sattler 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| Am Dienstag 16 Januar 2007 17:55 schrieb Michael Banck:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:22:51PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
>
> Contrary to us, GNOME (in this case RedHat) actually employs usability
> experts. Who are we to think we know better?
Well, because usability is no science where only one thing is the correct=20
thing to do? Are the Gnome usability experts do usability tests with new=20
users of Gnome?
Actually, both ways have a good usability from a specific POV, depending wh=
ich=20
parts of a user base (each having specific assumptions about how things wor=
k)=20
you look at.
> The relevant upstream bug is
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D312399
> if you want to have more information about this.
If you actually read it, you see the points that were also in the thread,=20
here. Either eog and evince (and all other viewers) are to be hidden or bot=
h=20
should be visible. Everything in between is actually bad usability.
Looking at the problems mentioned in the above URL, it's better to avoid th=
e=20
mentioned problems and unhide them for now, and change that when those=20
problems are resolved.
And since they are unhidable, the Gnome people show that they were not _tha=
t_=20
sure about the thing with the hidden viewers. They weaken their point with=
=20
such a possibility.
HS
| |
| Bernhard R. Link 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| * Lo?c Minier <lool+debian@via.ecp.fr> [070116 10:50]:
> I can imagine technical solutions to these problems, such as a) making
> XPM optional and automatically generating it when it's not available
> (yes, this might result in an ugly icon in some cases, but at least we
> will have an ugly icon vaguely ressembling the icon, and it might also
> result in nicer icons for PNG capable menu displays),
You can just translate the icons yourself. If you consider them ugly,
just add a new field for "nice" icons and start persuade people to
tell their menu methods to use those settings first. (with most
every admin and most of the time even user can just change that with
a single edit of the menu-methods file).
> b) using the
> .desktop files upstream provides to automatically register entries in
> the Debian menu (Note that the inverse process exists in menu-xdg .
>
> Without this, Debian menu support in Debian packages will always lag
> behind as upstream updates its .desktop files, icons etc. or
> adds/remove programs.
Well, to be perhaps a bit too frank: a maintainer that cannot cope with
menu files should consider orphaning a package. If you do not even know
which programs appear and vanish, you simply have lost. And simply
copying upstream decisions for names and sections or even icons will
simply make out menu a total mess, as different upstreams will have
different rules.
I hope people will not suggest next to not follow FHS, but install
everything where upstream thinks is the best place to put it, as
Debian packages cleary lack behind because we don't just put it
whereever it ends up... </sarkasm>
Hochachtungsvoll,
Bernhard R. Link
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Loïc Minier 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| On Tue, Jan 16, 2007, Bernhard R. Link wrote:
> * Lo?c Minier <lool+debian@via.ecp.fr> [070116 10:50]:
> You can just translate the icons yourself.
I want to spare me the time to do the update manually, but you suggest
I augment the amount of manual work. Would the Debian menu system do
this for me, I wouldn't have to. I usually prefer it when machines do
the repetitive instead of me.
> If you consider them ugly,
> just add a new field for "nice" icons and start persuade people to
> tell their menu methods to use those settings first.
Why reinvent the wheel in the Debian menu system? Why would I want to
convert nicely looking upstream icons to an old format which can only
look uglier? All desktop environments support pngs, and even svgs.
And I do not benefit of the Debian menu system personally, I only see
it as cluttering my GNOME menu, so I prefer spending my time in things
which improve Debian as well, but which I enjoy doing and don't
consider useless.
>
> Well, to be perhaps a bit too frank: a maintainer that cannot cope with
> menu files should consider orphaning a package.
I actually don't think orphaning packages make them any better.
You're welcome to join pkg-gnome and fix the Debian menu entries. In
fact, any help is welcome, not just on fixing menu entries. Hop in
#gnome-debian on GIMPNet, and I'll be happy to guide you in
participating to tasks of the team.
> If you do not even know
> which programs appear and vanish, you simply have lost.
Sorry, but people make mistakes. This is why we avoid duplicating data
in databases, and we avoid duplicating code in programs. I don't see
why the Debian menu would be so special that it would require me to
maintain menu entries in parallel to the .desktop files.
You've taken the time to criticize my personal position with
respect to the menu system, I suggest you also take the time to read
the technical proposals I made to improve the menu system.
The Debian menu system will not magically become useful to me, but at
least it will automatically cover packages of maintainers which do not
make it a priority to support the menu system fully in all their
packages.
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Luca Capello 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| | |
| Luca Capello 2007-01-16, 7:28 pm |
| | |
| Steve Langasek 2007-01-17, 1:35 am |
| On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:55:53PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:22:51PM +0100, Tim Dijkstra wrote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
[vbcol=seagreen]
> Contrary to us, GNOME (in this case RedHat) actually employs usability
> experts. Who are we to think we know better?
Real users with brains, instead of the idealized "ooh I'm afraid of
computers eek a mouse kill it kill it!!!" novice idiots who are the
exclusive target of all modern usability testing?
All computer usability studies I've seen in the past 4 or so years have
focused entirely on how a user who has never seen the interface before is
able to accomplish tasks, with no consideration given to the long-term
efficiency of the interfaces that happen to have the lowest inital learning
curve. Thus their goal is to help win market share, not to help make users
more productive, and should be shunned as the near-sighted marketing crap
they really are.
Cheers ,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-17, 7:22 am |
| Le mardi 16 janvier 2007 =E0 20:22 -0800, Steve Langasek a =E9crit :
> Real users with brains, instead of the idealized "ooh I'm afraid of
> computers eek a mouse kill it kill it!!!" novice idiots who are the
> exclusive target of all modern usability testing?
>=20
> All computer usability studies I've seen in the past 4 or so years have
> focused entirely on how a user who has never seen the interface before is
> able to accomplish tasks, with no consideration given to the long-term
> efficiency of the interfaces that happen to have the lowest inital learni=
ng
> curve. Thus their goal is to help win market share, not to help make use=
rs
> more productive, and should be shunned as the near-sighted marketing crap
> they really are.
Instead of wondering who is a usability expert and who is not, which
won't lead anywhere, the real question is: what use case does this or
that feature solve, and how to improve this use case, for both novice
and expert users?
Having eog and evince in the menu serves the "I want to look at a file I
know I have on my disk" case. But you can open the file in the same
number of clicks but with a better interface, by launching a nautilus
window. You can get it even faster if it's still in the "recently used"
menu.
In all cases, the most important problem here is that eog is in the menu
while evince is not. Inconsistency is the worst usability problem, and
it is also easily fixed.
--=20
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Tim Dijkstra 2007-01-17, 7:22 am |
| On Wed, 17 Jan 2007 09:28:06 +0100
Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> wrote:
> Having eog and evince in the menu serves the "I want to look at a file I
> know I have on my disk" case. But you can open the file in the same
> number of clicks but with a better interface, by launching a nautilus
> window. You can get it even faster if it's still in the "recently used"
> menu.
I would say lots of people are used to think in the following way:
I want to open file `foo'.
Start program that handles file `foo'.
Open file `foo'
This works with files that you can edit (abiword files) and those you
can't (pdf). A distinction between the two is IMHO artificial.
Why not facilitate people that work like this and have one more entry
in the menu?
I would say there is even a better case for having evince in the menu
then for eog. eog opens files you can edit with programs like gimp,
while for evince there is no alternative `editor'.
grts Tim
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Sebastian Heinlein 2007-01-17, 7:23 am |
| Quoting Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org>:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:55:53PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
s[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
>
> Real users with brains, instead of the idealized "ooh I'm afraid of
> computers eek a mouse kill it kill it!!!" novice idiots who are the
> exclusive target of all modern usability testing?
>
> All computer usability studies I've seen in the past 4 or so years have
> focused entirely on how a user who has never seen the interface before is
> able to accomplish tasks, with no consideration given to the long-term
> efficiency of the interfaces that happen to have the lowest inital learni=
ng
> curve. Thus their goal is to help win market share, not to help make use=
rs
> more productive, and should be shunned as the near-sighted marketing crap
> they really are.
You have also to take a look how efficient a way is. Finding a menu entry i=
n a
long list is quite ineffcient (Fitts' law). Compare the two menus in
Debian and
Ubuntu.
Even the long term user has to scan the complete menu to find a special ent=
ry
every time. So it also makes sense to reduce it to the real important entri=
es.
Why should I always see the perhaps never used Esd barometer when I want to
launch a multimedia related app?
Furthermore it would be nice if you speak about other people and their
work more
respectfully.
Cheers,
Sebastian
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-17, 1:18 pm |
| On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 20:22 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 05:55:53PM +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
>
>
>
> Real users with brains, instead of the idealized "ooh I'm afraid of
> computers eek a mouse kill it kill it!!!" novice idiots who are the
> exclusive target of all modern usability testing?
How dare you spake badly of the glorious teachings of the exalted Havoc
Pennington. SANE DEFAULTS!
> All computer usability studies I've seen in the past 4 or so years have
> focused entirely on how a user who has never seen the interface before is
> able to accomplish tasks, with no consideration given to the long-term
> efficiency of the interfaces that happen to have the lowest initial learning
> curve. Thus their goal is to help win market share, not to help make users
> more productive, and should be shunned as the near-sighted marketing crap
> they really are.
Praise $YOUR_DEITY! There is another that feels this way. It is also
evident others do as well, because of much the customization stuff that
used to be in Gnome 1.4, is being brought back using all these new
add-ons, being window managers and effects adders, coloring styles
controls, window placement based on what they do... etc.
> Cheers ,
Indeed. Cheers!
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| Jeff Carr 2007-01-17, 7:28 pm |
| On 01/16/07 20:22, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Thus their goal is to help win market share,
That's an important goal.
Have you heard this before: the fear is that not gaining significant
market share will allow Microsoft to effectively render free software
unusable by the average user.
> not to help make users more productive,
Also an important goal.
> and should be shunned as
One could send better ideas to the marketing people...
> the near-sighted marketing
Trying to win market share from Microsoft takes far-forward thinking.
crap they really are.
Let's hope some gems show up in the rough.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Manoj Srivastava 2007-01-18, 7:30 am |
| On Tue, 16 Jan 2007 21:43:43 +0100, Loïc Minier <lool+debian@via.ecp.fr> said:
> I don't see why the Debian menu would be so special that it would
> require me to maintain menu entries in parallel to the .desktop
> files.
Because as a Debian maintainer of gnome programs that work
even when you are not using gnome, you are not just supporting people
who use gnome, you are supporting _all_ Debian users.
Not all of us are using window managers that grok .desktop
entries. Indeed, I would think that instead of having gnome menus,
kde menus, and Debian menus, we should dump the first two before we
dump the latter, since the Debian menu is something that we control,
and is something that benefits _all_ Debian users, not just a subset.
manoj
--
What is now proved was once only imagin'd. William Blake
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| sean finney 2007-01-18, 7:30 am |
| On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 01:25 -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Not all of us are using window managers that grok .desktop
> entries. Indeed, I would think that instead of having gnome menus,
> kde menus, and Debian menus, we should dump the first two before we
> dump the latter, since the Debian menu is something that we control,
> and is something that benefits _all_ Debian users, not just a subset.
though honestly, i think the "debian menu" is inferior to the "upstream
menu" layout found in kde/gnome from a user standpoint. perhaps i'm not
the only one who finds the debian menu a little clunky, crufty and out
of date? that's not to say i don't appreciate what it does.
ideally, there ought to be some kind of way to either
generate .menu/xpm-format files from .desktop files or vice versa (with
appropriate automagical section mapping).
sean
| |
| Loïc Minier 2007-01-18, 7:30 am |
| On Thu, Jan 18, 2007, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Because as a Debian maintainer of gnome programs that work
> even when you are not using gnome, you are not just supporting people
> who use gnome, you are supporting _all_ Debian users.
Yes, but if 90% of the users of these packages do not use the Debian
menu it gets lower priority than the other tasks. Beside, my remark is
taken out of context: it was not meant to imply we should drop the
Debian menu altogether as you imply, but as a criticism of the current
technical problems of the Debian menu which makes it a maintenance
burden.
--
Loïc Minier <lool@dooz.org>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gtk-gnome-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Wouter Verhelst 2007-01-18, 1:18 pm |
| On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 04:42:21PM -0800, Jeff Carr wrote:
> On 01/16/07 20:22, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
>
> That's an important goal.
How about we don't care about the crap that is "market share", but only
about the things that really matter, such as "is it useful"?
If "it takes some getting used to, but after that it's much more useful
than what most people use" is what Debian gets known by, then I'm quite
sure our "market share" will start rising, too.
Yes, market share is useful to some extent, since at the very least it
helps in getting more interesting brains working on our system. But if
"market share" gets in the way of quality, then "market share" can go
where the sun don't shine.
--
<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Miles Bader 2007-01-19, 7:30 pm |
| Michael Banck <mbanck@debian.org> writes:
>
> Contrary to us, GNOME (in this case RedHat) actually employs usability
> experts. Who are we to think we know better?
Actual users?
-Miles
--
`...the Soviet Union was sliding in to an economic collapse so comprehensive
that in the end its factories produced not goods but bads: finished products
less valuable than the raw materials they were made from.' [The Economist]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Miles Bader 2007-01-19, 7:30 pm |
| Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> writes:
> Having eog and evince in the menu serves the "I want to look at a file I
> know I have on my disk" case. But you can open the file in the same
> number of clicks but with a better interface, by launching a nautilus
> window.
"Better interface" for some people perhaps. I don't run Nautilus at all
(and don't want to, it's simply not a very nice program), but I
certainly use Gnome apps to look at files.
The Gnome project has apparently developed an enormous blindspot because
of their fixation with novice users, but Debian need not follow this.
That's the beauty of free software.
-Miles
--
`Cars give people wonderful freedom and increase their opportunities.
But they also destroy the environment, to an extent so drastic that
they kill all social life' (from _A Pattern Language_)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Michael Banck 2007-01-20, 1:27 am |
| On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 02:27:23PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
> Michael Banck <mbanck@debian.org> writes:
>
> Actual users?
I'm not quite sure what your point is. Are you asserting the GNOME
usability engineers are not actually using GNOME?
Michael
--
"BTW, I have cleaned up libihash from ground up, and used typedefs for
the various types (I just couldn't stand the void ****locps anymore)"
-- Marcus Brinkmann
"Aw, thomas was so proud of that..."
-- Miles Bader
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-20, 7:23 am |
| On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 02:50 +0100, Michael Banck wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2007 at 02:27:23PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote:
>
> I'm not quite sure what your point is. Are you asserting the GNOME
> usability engineers are not actually using GNOME?
I would assert they are not listening to their former BIGGEST fans and
users. You can easily find droves rants/discussions of current GNOME
users very disgruntled with the REMOVAL of features that previously were
there. Some users are now FORMER GNOME users due to these removals.
For myself personally GNOME 1.4 was very well featured. Though it wasn't
"put together" as well as 2.16 is today. The removal of the easy to use
mechanisms to change behavior has been a thorn in my side something
awful. This trend to initial users having a "safe" experience is just
about killing me.
If you take a look at all the project trying to "add" those things being
taken out by the GNOME team and its usability experts with the drone of
"SANE DEFAULTS" and then taking away the means to change them once you
get past the safeness of that... the noise to me is deafening.
They routinely and as if by willful decisions, ignore the "mid-level
user" to "power user" as *NOT* being the target audience. At least
acknowledge that by help the beginning users... please DO NOT HARM or
HINDER these learned user.
well, to be honest, I only use GNOME now because as an integrated
desktop, at the moment: It is "THE SUCKEST THE LEASTEST"
If you do not understand my meaning, think if Devil's Pie, the
power-toyz add-ons, this recent addiction with eye-candy again (much
similar to what GNOME and SAW-FISH/MILL could already do years ago.
While, I praise the GNOME teams for the timely march on-ward, I also
curse them for the ignorant ways of calling balderdash to anything to
improve the computing experience of the "very skilled user" or "power
user"
I am sorry, I've read to much from other people on this subject. I've
also voiced my opinion from time to time... in rants. But the progress I
still see (yes progress, but what kind I don't know) is disappointing.
That is all for now. And probably quite a while, unless someone gets my
ire up on the subject again.
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-20, 7:23 am |
| Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 04:30 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit :
> I would assert they are not listening to their former BIGGEST fans and
> users. You can easily find droves rants/discussions of current GNOME
> users very disgruntled with the REMOVAL of features that previously were
> there. Some users are now FORMER GNOME users due to these removals.
Features. Features, features, features. Do you only want features,
without even knowing whether they are useful? Sorry, usability is not
about features.
I, for one, thank those usability engineers for removing these tons of
useless features that clutter menus, desktop, applications, and dialog
boxes. You can gain much productivity by removing them, and that doesn't
only account for newbie users. There is still work to do, e.g. by
looking at the insane list of capplets.
--
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Stephen Gran 2007-01-20, 7:23 am |
| This one time, at band camp, Josselin Mouette said:
> Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 04:30 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit :
>
> Features. Features, features, features. Do you only want features,
> without even knowing whether they are useful? Sorry, usability is not
> about features.
And that really just proves Greg's point, doesn't it? Clearly the
features were useful to Greg, or he wouldn't have written that email.
Thankfully, the GNOME developers know better.
> I, for one, thank those usability engineers for removing these tons of
> useless features that clutter menus, desktop, applications, and dialog
> boxes.
I, for one, welcome our new GNOME overlords.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| ,''`. Stephen Gran |
| : :' : sgran@debian.org |
| `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer |
| `- http://www.debian.org |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-20, 7:23 am |
| On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 11:51 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 Ã_ 04:30 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit :
>
> Features. Features, features, features. Do you only want features,
> without even knowing whether they are useful? Sorry, usability is not
> about features.
Are you telling me that these features I keep see getting removed are
*NOT* about usability for me? OK, functionality to me... Functionality
for me determines my usability. It I have to use some archaic command
like (btw I don't really mind them *IF* they are well documented) but
like:
gconftool-2.3-1-9.mark32 -a2 -r4 --/usr/sbin/someothercommand \
\-\-optionforexternalcommand -32 --etc -e -t-c \
--corruptmysettingsplease
I'm not really thrilled.
> I, for one, thank those usability engineers for removing these tons of
> useless
USELESS, maybe to many. Remember in GNOME 1.4 there was a "expertise
setting" for the amount and number of settings shown? I do. Sure, as a
default provide only the basics. But let me install the "medium" or
"power" or "stupidly-insane" settings user. It doesn't hurt to partition
them that way... why remove them IF the basic user won't have access to
them until they realize there is other config managers for the medium or
power or insanity-based users.
> features that clutter menus, desktop, applications, and dialog
> boxes. You
s/You/Some/
> can gain much productivity by removing them, and that doesn't
> only account for newbie users. There is still work to do, e.g. by
> looking at the insane list of capplets.
Sure, continue driving the people that made GNOME popular early on. Good
plan.
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 2007-01-20, 1:18 pm |
| On Saturday 20 January 2007 11:51, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 04:30 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit :
>
> Features. Features, features, features. Do you only want features,
> without even knowing whether they are useful? Sorry, usability is not
> about features.
Wikipedia defines usability as :
Usability is a term used to denote the ease with which people can employ a
particular tool or other human-made object in order to achieve a
particular goal.
ISO 9241-11 (1998) Guidance on Usability, defines usability as:
The extent to which a product can be used by specified users to achieve
specified goals with effectiveness, efficiency and satisfaction in a
specified context of use.
By taking out features you decrease the number of goals you can use the
software for. If you can't use the software for a certain goal at all then
it's less usable for that goal then a package with an interface from hell
that does let you addres that goal.
=> by definition taking out (lots of) features decreases the maximum
usability of the software.
> I, for one, thank those usability engineers for removing these tons of
> useless features that clutter menus, desktop, applications, and dialog
> boxes.
IMHO that just means those usability engineers took the easy way out of a
scaling problem: instead of adressing the actual problem, they just made
sure they didn't have to deal with it.
Yes, organizing lots of features so all them are easy to use is a very hard
problem. BUT those fabled usabillity engineers not only turned tail and
ran, they mobbed everyone who dared to point they did.
As far as I'm conserned the emperor isn't waring any clothes.
> You can gain much productivity by removing them, and that doesn't
> only account for newbie users.
Every one of those features came to be because it scratched someones itch,
judging by the amount of rants and complaints I've seen about those removed
features those itches still need scratching.
Thus Gnome has actively stopped a whole slew of users from scratching their
itches the way they did before. IMHO that's monementally stupid.
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-20, 1:18 pm |
| Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 13:34 +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) a
écrit :
> By taking out features you decrease the number of goals you can use the
> software for. If you can't use the software for a certain goal at all then
> it's less usable for that goal then a package with an interface from hell
> that does let you addres that goal.
That's what happens when you do it stupidly.
> IMHO that just means those usability engineers took the easy way out of a
> scaling problem: instead of adressing the actual problem, they just made
> sure they didn't have to deal with it.
Why do you assume it? The usability processes in GNOME imply, on the
contrary, that there is a good way to achieve every use case. Improving
usability often means replacing two non-optimal ways of doing something
by a single, better way of doing it. You only see the two things
removed, through the deforming glasses of the rumor, and miss the
overall usability improvement.
--
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Ross Burton 2007-01-20, 1:18 pm |
| On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 06:34 -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
> Are you telling me that these features I keep see getting removed are
> *NOT* about usability for me? OK, functionality to me... Functionality
> for me determines my usability. It I have to use some archaic command
> like (btw I don't really mind them *IF* they are well documented) but
> like:
If you have any particular pet features that have been removed in GNOME
and you can make a valid case for their re-inclusion, then file a bug.
Contrary to popular belief GNOME isn't about removing as many features
as possible.
Ross
--
Ross Burton mail: ross@burtonini.com
jabber: ross@burtonini.com
www: http://www.burtonini.com./
PGP Fingerprint: 1A21 F5B0 D8D0 CFE3 81D4 E25A 2D09 E447 D0B4 33DF
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-20, 1:18 pm |
| On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 14:13 +0000, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 06:34 -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
>
> If you have any particular pet features that have been removed in GNOME
> and you can make a valid case for their re-inclusion, then file a bug.
> Contrary to popular belief GNOME isn't about removing as many features
> as possible.
I understand that Ross. But, I would be ONE of those NON-Target users so
often used to defend the decisions/directions of the almighty Havoc's
teachings.
Sorry Ross, but I long ago gave up trying to change minds (about 2.4ish
to 2.6ish) when I saw that they were set in fast setting concrete. Yes,
I know you are one of the ones at least trying to help the situation. I
have (err, have had) your burtonini repository in my sources.list in the
past. So I do know your place and your work.
In any case, I see lots of bugs that needs fixing, as the easiest way to
fix then is to remove the offending feature that isn't *REALLY* needed
once the usability experts jump on it.
Yes, I also know, that I have not opened any bugs, but who am I in the
GNOME community? I'll tell you who... a big fat nobody. The powers that
be, that read these GNOME wishlist/case justification bugs look at me...
see "bug filed by a bug, squash it" as I have zero rank to them to
change the mind of the GNOME team. Oh, just to be sure, I've had some
real doozies with a few on the GNOME team. One explained to me...
EXACTLY how much impact a single Power User filing a bug for
re-inclusion or halting removal of said features... it increases the
fervor at which this stuff is rejected.(1)
So, unless something has drastically changed since ~2003-2005 time
frame, I seriously doubt (know) I won't have any impact to scratch my
itch, even *IF* I included a PERFECT set of patches.
I truly thank you for your efforts to help those of us cast aside, not
being in the target audience, to be more comfortable and productive in
the GNOME Desktop Environment.
1 == Now mind you I can't find the reference to it at the moment. And
really I am not inclined to devote more than the 10 minutes I've spent
looking for it.
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 2007-01-20, 1:18 pm |
| On Saturday 20 January 2007 14:21, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 13:34 +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) a
>
> Why do you assume it? The usability processes in GNOME imply, on the
> contrary, that there is a good way to achieve every use case.
> Improving usability often means replacing two non-optimal ways of doing
> something by a single, better way of doing it.
no disagreement here, provided that's possible, it often isn't
> You only see the two things removed, through the deforming glasses of the
> rumor, and miss the overall usability improvement.
So Gnome has obviously not 'removed tons of features' (your words), they've
instead consolidated features, replacing multiple features with single
better features all over the place?
And I suppose the mountains of rants and complaints on the subject are all
from (power) users that failed to find the new consolidated features,
right?
Off course:
- if so you have a usability problem (as clearly indicated by lots of power
users not finding the consolidated features)
- if not, my point stands
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
| |
| David Weinehall 2007-01-21, 1:26 am |
| On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 06:34:18AM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 11:51 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>
> Are you telling me that these features I keep see getting removed are
> *NOT* about usability for me? OK, functionality to me... Functionality
> for me determines my usability. It I have to use some archaic command
> like (btw I don't really mind them *IF* they are well documented) but
> like:
> gconftool-2.3-1-9.mark32 -a2 -r4 --/usr/sbin/someothercommand \
> \-\-optionforexternalcommand -32 --etc -e -t-c \
> --corruptmysettingsplease
You *do* know that there is a graphical gconf-editor, right?
[snip]
Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-21, 1:26 am |
| Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 à 15:21 +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) a
écrit :
> So Gnome has obviously not 'removed tons of features' (your words), they've
> instead consolidated features, replacing multiple features with single
> better features all over the place?
> And I suppose the mountains of rants and complaints on the subject are all
> from (power) users that failed to find the new consolidated features,
> right?
>
> Off course:
> - if so you have a usability problem (as clearly indicated by lots of power
> users not finding the consolidated features)
The most important drawback of this process is indeed that power users
can get lost across upgrades, because the immediate effect they notice
is "this action doesn't work anymore".
This is a general problem in Debian, as a constantly evolving system.
Many user and developer habits can become quickly obsolete, and it's not
an easy task to push the information.
--
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Luca Capello 2007-01-21, 1:26 am |
| | |
| Stephen Gran 2007-01-21, 1:26 am |
| This one time, at band camp, David Weinehall said:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 06:34:18AM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
>
> You *do* know that there is a graphical gconf-editor, right?
Is it called regedit.exe?
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| ,''`. Stephen Gran |
| : :' : sgran@debian.org |
| `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer |
| `- http://www.debian.org |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-21, 1:26 am |
| On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 21:16 +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 06:34:18AM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
>
> You *do* know that there is a graphical gconf-editor, right?
>
> [snip]
Umm yes, a clumsy replacement for a former GOOD configuration system.
Sure, it has paths and other junk... many things are not able to be
edited or added in gconf-editor. gconf-editor is a pile of crap. No
better than the cli ones.
I have regularly had my GCONF stuff partially corrupted in any case.
Associations go away, programs crash spontaneously, I look for bugs...
find the exact same things I have. Solution or workaround? remove *ALL*
user gconf and gnome settings. Literally nuke them.
I sure love a (un-)reliable configuration system being pushed on me this
way, piece of crap. Regularly, I get a Fresh desktop to configure...
WEE!
Come on, continuous refreshment is REALLY good for someone that needs to
get work done... yeah wasting time fixing things to work the way he
wants.
Or, I can just adjust the way I work to be a NEW USER all the time...
*GREAT* I now get to work like a completely useless computer user... to
get my stuff done! YEAH! Way to go TEAM GNOME!
This happens FAR to often to be unrelated and rare. Or maybe I guess I
really am a troublesome user.
Pardon me while I wipe up the severe sarcasm spillage.
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| Steve Langasek 2007-01-21, 7:25 am |
| On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 11:45:32AM +0000, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
> You have also to take a look how efficient a way is. Finding a menu entry
> in a
> long list is quite ineffcient (Fitts' law). Compare the two menus in
> Debian and
> Ubuntu.
It's infinitely easier to find an item in a long menu than it is to find the
same item in a short menu that doesn't include the item in question.
> Furthermore it would be nice if you speak about other people and their
> work more
> respectfully.
It would be nice if more people were doing respectable work. ;-)
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Mike Hommey 2007-01-21, 7:25 am |
| On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 02:30:46AM -0800, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 11:45:32AM +0000, Sebastian Heinlein wrote:
>
> It's infinitely easier to find an item in a long menu than it is to find the
> same item in a short menu that doesn't include the item in question.
It's easier to find an item in a short menu than in a long menu that is
cluttered by useless stuff.
Mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Yves-Alexis Perez 2007-01-21, 7:25 am |
| On dim, 2007-01-21 at 12:31 +0000, Stephen Gran wrote:
> This could quickly get recursive. Let me save you the trouble:
>
> while true; do
> echo "kool-aid drinker: it's easier to find an item in a short menu"
> | \
> mail -s "Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?"
> debian-devel@listss.debian.org
> echo "everyone else: it's impossible to find an item that isn't
> there" | \
> mail -s "Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?"
> debian-devel@listss.debian.org
> done
>
This one isn't really recursive.
--
Yves-Alexis
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Stephen Gran 2007-01-21, 7:25 am |
| This one time, at band camp, Mike Hommey said:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2007 at 02:30:46AM -0800, Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> wrote:
>
> It's easier to find an item in a short menu than in a long menu that
> is cluttered by useless stuff.
This could quickly get recursive. Let me save you the trouble:
while true; do
echo "kool-aid drinker: it's easier to find an item in a short menu" | \
mail -s "Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?" debian-devel@listss.debian.org
echo "everyone else: it's impossible to find an item that isn't there" | \
mail -s "Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?" debian-devel@listss.debian.org
done
Thanks,
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| ,''`. Stephen Gran |
| : :' : sgran@debian.org |
| `. `' Debian user, admin, and developer |
| `- http://www.debian.org |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| Debian Oracle 2007-01-21, 1:18 pm |
| On su, 2007-01-21 at 13:38 +0100, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> On dim, 2007-01-21 at 12:31 +0000, Stephen Gran wrote:
>
> This one isn't really recursive.
The Debian Oracle has detected an implicit question!
Loops are, in fact, recursion! More importantly, they are an optimized
version of tail recursion. The loop above could be written as:
debian_discussion_about_gnome_menus()
{
echo "kool-aid drinker: it's easier to find an item in a short menu" |
mail -s "Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?" debian-devel@listss.debian.org
echo "everyone else: it's impossible to find an item that isn't there" |
mail -s "Re: Bugs in default GNOME etch?" debian-devel@listss.debian.org
debian_discussion_about_gnome-menus
}
In fact, if you use an implementation of your preferred language that
does not optimize tail recursion stack usage, you have a better
simulation of the Debian discussions: eventually the stack will
overflow, and the discussion will end. In real life, Debian discussions
also eventually end, for example when all participants on one side of
the debate graduate from school and no longer have extra free time.
Nifty!
Because the Debian Oracle is in an especially good mood today, you get
an extra answer: the correct, and traditional solution method to the
Dilemma About GNOME Menus in Debian is to make it possible to have
either the GNOME-style menus (short, nothing unnecessary) or the
Debian-style ones (huge, everything is in there, sometimes multiple
times). Everyone can be happy!
You owe the Oracle a pair of snow shoes, a shovel, warm gloves, and a
hair-dryer.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Margarita Manterola 2007-01-21, 1:18 pm |
| Hi!
On 1/20/07, Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> wrote:
> There is still work to do, e.g. by
> looking at the insane list of capplets.
If you are referring to the gnome-panel applets. May I remind you
that this list used to be organized in menues, with lines of the same
size of items in the Applications menu. At those good-old-times, you
could add an applet within two mouse movements. Now, adding an applet
usually take about half a minute of scrolling through a list that is
uselessly big and finding the stupid applet.
So, please, do not remove the applets. Fix the list. i.e. make it
like it was before. it was MUCH better before. I acknowledge that
the first time you wanted to add something, you might perhaps choose
the wrong menu, so you'd have to go back and select the correct menu.
So, this was "fixed" by eliminating the menus. How this could ever be
considered a fix, I could never understand.
--
Besos,
Marga
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| David Weinehall 2007-01-21, 1:18 pm |
| On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:32:07PM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 21:16 +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
>
> Umm yes, a clumsy replacement for a former GOOD configuration system.
My mention of the gconf-editor wasn't about whether it's a good or bad
way of configurating a system, just pointing out that your arguments
would be more credible if you didn't use contrived examples to make
seem more complicated than they are.
> Sure, it has paths and other junk... many things are not able to be
> edited or added in gconf-editor. gconf-editor is a pile of crap. No
> better than the cli ones.
>
> I have regularly had my GCONF stuff partially corrupted in any case.
> Associations go away, programs crash spontaneously, I look for bugs...
> find the exact same things I have. Solution or workaround? remove *ALL*
> user gconf and gnome settings. Literally nuke them.
Fascinating. That's *never* happened here. Ever.
[snip]
Oh, and by the way, there's very few things I've ever lacked in ways of
configuration in GNOME; in fact, the only thing I can think of is how
focusing works in metacity. It's implementation of sloppy focus is
quite lousy IMHO, but then again, not even changing the focus setting
through gconf helps that, since it's a lousy implementation, not lack of
configurability that causes my grief.
Regards: David
--
/) David Weinehall <tao@debian.org> /) Rime on my window (\
// ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ // Diamond-white roses of fire //
\) http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/ (/ Beautiful hoar-frost (/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-21, 1:18 pm |
| On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 18:06 +0100, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 09:32:07PM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
>
> My mention of the gconf-editor wasn't about whether it's a good or bad
> way of configurating a system, just pointing out that your arguments
> would be more credible if you didn't use contrived examples to make
> seem more complicated than they are.
Then why mention it at all? My contrived example is plausible.
>
> Fascinating. That's *never* happened here. Ever.
Oh, sorry. I guess this is my bad, I guess *I AM* the only one. In that
case. Then move along now, nothing to see here, keep you eyes to
yourself
>
> [snip]
>
> Oh, and by the way, there's very few things I've ever lacked in ways of
> configuration in GNOME; in fact, the only thing I can think of is how
> focusing works in metacity. It's implementation of sloppy focus is
> quite lousy IMHO, but then again, not even changing the focus setting
> through gconf helps that, since it's a lousy implementation, not lack of
> configurability that causes my grief.
I guess you have tricked yourself into working like a newbie.
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-22, 1:17 pm |
| Le dimanche 21 janvier 2007 =E0 12:46 -0300, Margarita Manterola a =E9crit =
:
> Hi!
>=20
> On 1/20/07, Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> wrote:
>=20
> If you are referring to the gnome-panel applets.
No, I'm talking about the capplets (the "settings" menu).
> So, please, do not remove the applets. Fix the list. i.e. make it
> like it was before.
Novell has written a new shell to replace the control-center. While it
is completely useless bloat for capplets (or at least, it would if
capplets were merged appropriately and useless ones were removed), I
hope it will be used for panel applets insertion.
--=20
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-22, 1:17 pm |
| Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 =E0 21:32 -0500, Greg Folkert a =E9crit :
> I have regularly had my GCONF stuff partially corrupted in any case.
> Associations go away, programs crash spontaneously, I look for bugs...
> find the exact same things I have. Solution or workaround? remove *ALL*
> user gconf and gnome settings. Literally nuke them.
You're not forced to listen to any dumb wannabee who tells you to clean
your settings everytime you have a problem.
--=20
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-22, 1:17 pm |
| On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 15:12 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le samedi 20 janvier 2007 Ã_ 21:32 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit :
>
> You're not forced to listen to any dumb wannabee who tells you to clean
> your settings everytime you have a problem.
Yeap, you are right. I am dumb.
But let me ask you this, are you telling me that I need to spend *MUCH*
more time to fix the settings than to remove them and reconstruct my
desktop.
I guess my time isn't worth anything. I bow to your obvious better
knowledge.
</sarcams>
Come on Joss, are you *REALLY* that obtuse?
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 2007-01-22, 1:17 pm |
| | |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-22, 1:17 pm |
| Le lundi 22 janvier 2007 =E0 09:59 -0500, Greg Folkert a =E9crit :
> Yeap, you are right. I am dumb.
I was not sure of it, but this mail just convinced me you are.
> But let me ask you this, are you telling me that I need to spend *MUCH*
> more time to fix the settings than to remove them and reconstruct my
> desktop.
How do you expect developers to fix bugs that happen in a certain
configuration if you simply wipe it out instead?
--=20
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-22, 7:21 pm |
| Le lundi 22 janvier 2007 =E0 16:44 +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) a
=E9crit :
> Those capplets were wanted enough to have been made, so obviously they=20
> scratch someones itch. Or in other words they're usefull to someone even =
if=20
> they're not usefull to you personally.
Oh, really?
Do you often need to call gstreamer-properties? This is the perfect
example of a useless feature. There should be good autodetection of the
default audio and video output, and in fact it is already here. Anything
else should be exceptional, and if the capplet should probably remain
available from the command line, it shouldn't remain in the menu.
Do you really think nautilus-file-management-properties is needed in the
menu? These are settings specific to nautilus navigation, and they are
available from every open nautilus window. Surely you'd expect nautilus
settings to be available from the panel and not in nautilus...
> The above paragraph only succeeds in reinforcing my believe that the gnom=
e=20
> usability engineers cut and ran instead of adressing the actual scaling=20
> problem. And the above seems to indicate gnome's all set on doing it all=20
> over again. I'm gonna guess that was not the picture you were trying to=20
> give?
Take the pictures you want. I'm not a photographer.
--=20
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-22, 7:21 pm |
| On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 17:30 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le lundi 22 janvier 2007 Ã_ 09:59 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit :
>
> I was not sure of it, but this mail just convinced me you are.
>
>
> How do you expect developers to fix bugs that happen in a certain
> configuration if you simply wipe it out instead?
I guess you are an obtuse useless developer, as you clipped out the
context. Choosing to only make snide remarks to nit and picks,
conveniently chosen to make me look like I don't know what I am talking
about.
I am telling you right now, that the BUGS of which I experience, I
"discover" the bugs in bugs.d.o. Exactly the same problems...
workarounds offered by the developers are typically non-existent and
typically are tagged "not reproducible" and closed with admonishment to
the bug-submitter.
Now you'd expect that from Debian, being the way Debian works. But I
switch to GNOME, I find them same or similar derned bugs in
bugzilla.g.o. Also with things like WONTFIX (being obsolete or feature
removed)or Not Reproducible or other ways to close the them .
I guess, GNOME snobbism flows out from the core.
I hope you realize what your are doing. Its comments like you have made
that keeps the reputation of the GNOME team and GNOME Distro teams it
the negative when you try to belittle and try to humiliate the people
that would like to use the product of your labors. It is more and more
clear the whole GNOME developer "gang" is just that.
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-22, 7:21 pm |
| Le lundi 22 janvier 2007 à 13:10 -0500, Greg Folkert a écrit :
> I am telling you right now, that the BUGS of which I experience, I
> "discover" the bugs in bugs.d.o. Exactly the same problems...
> workarounds offered by the developers are typically non-existent and
> typically are tagged "not reproducible" and closed with admonishment to
> the bug-submitter.
Oh, right. Now, you're blaming GNOME for the way Christian Marillat used
to deal with bugs. Fine.
> I hope you realize what your are doing. Its comments like you have made
> that keeps the reputation of the GNOME team and GNOME Distro teams it
> the negative when you try to belittle and try to humiliate the people
> that would like to use the product of your labors. It is more and more
> clear the whole GNOME developer "gang" is just that.
People who use the software and report bugs when they find some are more
likely to get support than those bashing on irrelevant mailing lists and
spreading unclear accusations.
You think you can make GNOME better by spreading rumors. I think I can
make GNOME better by co-maintaining the packages. Believe it or not, the
latter approach is more efficient.
--
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 2007-01-22, 7:21 pm |
| On Monday 22 January 2007 18:05, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le lundi 22 janvier 2007 à 16:44 +0100, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) a
> écrit :
>
> Oh, really?
>
> Do you often need to call gstreamer-properties? This is the perfect
> example of a useless feature.
Me? nope, but then I'm not an audiophile, and I'm guessing they both want
and need that kind of control often. This is the whole point:
ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL
> if the capplet should probably remain available from the command line, it
> shouldn't remain in the menu.
Right, cause gnome is a graphical environment, so by all means lets rip out
the graphical way of doing things, who needs anything but a command line
anyway...
How about a more sensible approach, like oh say:
have it configurable which capplets are shown in the menu, with a sensible
default list not showing any of the 'insane' ones?
But I guess that's not the gnome way, cause that would mean another useless
configuration option, much faster and easier to just rip it out instead.
> Do you really think nautilus-file-management-properties is needed in the
> menu? These are settings specific to nautilus navigation, and they are
> available from every open nautilus window. Surely you'd expect nautilus
> settings to be available from the panel and not in nautilus...
At first glance this would seem to be a clear case where consolidation is
both in order and obvious. I don't see any removed features in this case
(but then I'm not all that familiar with either, as I don't use nautilus
personal, hence the 'at first glance').
But then does it hurt to have the option to show it in a capplet in the
menu? (Note that 'option', it doesn't necessarily have to be on by default)
>
> Take the pictures you want. I'm not a photographer.
Sure, I'm just another (ex-)gnome user right? What I was trying to point out
is this:
1) the gnome approach to usability has a serious image problem and created a
huge user backlash (disgrunteld ex-gnome users abound)
2) your points here have _not_ helped mend that image, quite the contrary,
you've only reinforced it
Now if that's what you set out to do, then great. If not you might want to
reconsider your approach in the future.
--
Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-22, 7:21 pm |
| On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 19:32 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Oh, right. Now, you're blaming GNOME for the way Christian Marillat used
> to deal with bugs. Fine.
I bow GNOME Overlord.
> People who use the software and report bugs when they find some are more
> likely to get support than those bashing on irrelevant mailing lists and
> spreading unclear accusations.
>
> You think you can make GNOME better by spreading rumors. I think I can
> make GNOME better by co-maintaining the packages. Believe it or not, the
> latter approach is more efficient.
I now welcome you, as my extreme GNOME Overlord.
I guess this attempt is done. Same as it ever was.
--
greg, greg@gregfolkert.net
The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster: Linux
| |
| Wouter Verhelst 2007-01-26, 7:21 am |
| On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:13:37PM +0000, Ross Burton wrote:
> If you have any particular pet features that have been removed in GNOME
> and you can make a valid case for their re-inclusion, then file a bug.
I'm afraid the GNOME bugzilla can't handle that amount of bugs.
--
<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Wouter Verhelst 2007-01-26, 7:21 am |
| On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:21:17PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Why do you assume it? The usability processes in GNOME imply, on the
> contrary, that there is a good way to achieve every use case.
Thank you for this insight.
There is a PERL motto, and it says "TIMTOWTDI": There Is More Than One
Way To Do It.
There most be a GNOME motto, and it says "TSBOOWTDI": There Should Be
Only One Way To Do It.
I know which I prefer, and it's not the one that disallows me to do
things my way.
--
<Lo-lan-do> Home is where you have to wash the dishes.
-- #debian-devel, Freenode, 2004-09-22
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Mikhail Gusarov 2007-01-26, 1:19 pm |
|
Twas brillig at 13:19:36 26.01.2007 UTC+01 when Wouter Verhelst did gyre and gimble:
WV> There most be a GNOME motto, and it says "TSBOOWTDI": There
WV> Should Be Only One Way To Do It.
Actually, it's already the Python motto ;)
--
JID: dottedmag@jabber.dottedmag.net
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Josselin Mouette 2007-01-26, 1:19 pm |
| Le vendredi 26 janvier 2007 =E0 13:19 +0100, Wouter Verhelst a =E9crit :
> On Sat, Jan 20, 2007 at 02:21:17PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
>=20
> Thank you for this insight.
>=20
> There is a PERL motto, and it says "TIMTOWTDI": There Is More Than One
> Way To Do It.
>=20
> There most be a GNOME motto, and it says "TSBOOWTDI": There Should Be
> Only One Way To Do It.
As Mikhail noted, if you want to compare programming languages, you'll
find Python which has this exact same policy.=20
Both philosophies also exist in desktop environments, and it's good this
way. Each one has advantages the other can't compete with.
> I know which I prefer, and it's not the one that disallows me to do
> things my way.
For programming languages, I prefer the one that makes programmers
easily understand all code written by others. For desktop environments,
I prefer the one that provides the cleanest and most efficient UI. YMMV.
--=20
.''`.
: :' : We are debian.org. Lower your prices, surrender your code.
`. `' We will add your hardware and software distinctiveness to
`- our own. Resistance is futile.
| |
| Greg Folkert 2007-01-26, 1:19 pm |
| On Fri, 2007-01-26 at 15:15 +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> For programming languages, I prefer the one that makes programmers
> easily understand all code written by others. For desktop environments,
> I prefer the one that provides the cleanest and most efficient UI. YMMV.
Wow, my extreme GNOME Overlord wants a desolate landscape, made of
colored concrete, with concrete furniture and everything set in
concrete. Concrete made the of the Finest Hoover Portland, Italian
Marble Aggregate and the finest black sand from Wainapanapa beach.
Amazing. Since I have changed my habits to work like a new user, my
productivity has skyrocketed during the time which I was usually
"configuring" my desktop. Though, I still have to recover my
productivity on the time after this point. That has plummeted
drastically and continues to mull about there.
Sorry, I must refrain... last punch, I swear.
--
greg@gregfolkert.net
Novell's Directory Services is a competitive product to Microsoft's
Active Directory in much the same way that the Saturn V is a competitive
product to those dinky little model rockets that kids light off down at
the playfield. -- Thane Walkup
| |
|
| |