Calum: > For better or for worse, I still consider the Nevada desktop to be the > closest thing we currently have to the next Solaris desktop. IMHO this > means choosing the default menu contents and layout as carefully as ever > (and certainly more carefully than JDS3), not using it as a dumping > ground for every app that we ever feel like shipping :)
Regardless, it is probably a good idea to make sure that the desktop looks reasonable on Nevada. > There is already a Nevada UI desktop spec, although it's a bit out of > date currently: > <http://opensolaris.org/os/community/desktop/uispecs/nevada-uispec/> > > I intend to focus on the Nevada UI spec again once the 2008.11 UI spec > is frozen, because as you suggest, there probably ought to be more > convergence between the two than there is now. (But we certainly need > to figure out with marketing/branding where it makes sense to keep them > different.) I'd recommend that we try to update the Nevada UI spec as soon as possible, though I understand this will probably after we wrap up the OpenSolaris release. We should try to minimize the amount of time that Nevada looks bad. We can also address such issues as-we-go. If we are aware of particular applications that we don't want to show up in Nevada now, there's no reason we can't highlight them and add simple Nevada branding patches to remove those applications. Personally I don't have a problem with multiple applications for doing the same thing in the menus, but we should try to avoid making things look ridiculous. Likewise, programs that have known serious a11y, localization, usability, or other issues probably shouldn't be in the Nevada menus by default. There may be some programs that are "good enough" for downloading into Indiana, but not things we want to advertise by default in Nevada. -- Brian
