On Sat, Dec 05, 2015 at 08:34:27PM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote: > > I keep on failing how you draw the conclusion what users are > > expecting. > > OK, so could you describe what the expections of the users here are?
Long description, screenshot, citations, popcon, available in which release. > > Sorry, you are wrong here: I asked always *new* users (after talks > > presenting it or asking new colleagues). > > I misunderstood you here, sorry. I thought that you had asked people to > compare the current approach with the alternative one. No, I did not yet. > > Users are also very keen on seeing relevant publications. > > What dou you mean here? Publications are included in my design. See > > http://blends.debian.org/astro/tasks/viewers#saods9 > > as an example. Ahh, OK. May be I was to quick since I did not clicked on anything. May be I was to quick here. I need more time and we probably need more input since I'm definitely biased. I'm personally missing the color where a user would be attracted to work (translation + debtags). I also do not see with one look whether we have packaged the latest upstream or not. > Is not shortened at all. It contains almost everything what is in the > current approach. So, it has *additionally* to what you intended (please > write a few words about this) the advantage that one can have a better > overview if one likes. > > What exactly are you missing there? I was missing a clear sign that the single lines are expandable (I admit that the links on top are there now after looking closely). > > I do not care for the size but the fact that we have the entire > > information about the packages. > > This is there in my approach as well. You can have it selectively per > package (what I would prefer), or in one big piece (with the "#all" > hash). Switching between them is just one click. Got it. > But, page length finally *does* matter. Nobody wants to go though a > endless page. > > > You simply want something else which is fine but please do not > > describe it as replacement for the existing tasks pages. > > It can IMO replace it since it has the original content (minus the parts > that I still didn't implement yet). I think others should raise their opinions since I'm to biased and to used to the current look to be objective. Thanks for your work on this Andreas. -- http://fam-tille.de
