Maybe we should have a wiki page to list all the goals. Yen-Ju
On 7/29/07, Yen-Ju Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/29/07, Yen-Ju Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 7/29/07, David Chisnall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Now 0.2 is released, we can start thinking about 0.3[1] seriously. > > > I'd like to get a set of objectives for the release pinned down > > > early, so we know what we are aiming for. I would say the two big > > > ones are: > > > > > > - Documentation for everything. Every framework should have gsdoc > > > documentation for every public interface at a minimum (documentation > > > for the internal code is ideal, but not required). Every application > > > should have some a users' guide. > > > > > > - No UI bugs outstanding. Every UI bug should be either fixed, or > > > blamed on GNUstep (and, ideally, fixed and patches sent upstream). > > I would like to have a conclusion regarding the dock. > Dock serves many purposes, but also many controversies. > > First, it is a window switcher, which can be replace by AZSwitch. > Based on screenshots of OS X 10.5, > it is application switcher. In another word, > all the window of the same application has to > stay in the same desktop. > > Second, it is an application launcher. > I personally don't like this idea. > The solution is to have a menu shows all recently > opened applications, say up to 20. > In that case, users don't need to organize the dock anymore. > The more frequently used application will be on the upper part > of the menu. > > Third, it is a notifier (unread mail, message from IM, etc). > If we have a notifier framework and probably a menulet for that, > we don't need dock, either. > > Fourth, it provides limited contextual for a few action on application > without make them active first. > I am not sure it is really usefully except 'empty trash'. > > So my propose is to remove the dock. > If you want to launch commonly-used applications, > we add a menu for that on menu bar. > If you want to switch window, use 'Alt-tab'. > If you want to see whether you have unread mail, > maybe we can show it with 'Alt-tab' (with some Xwindow trick) > or have a notifier framework for that. > What else is missing ? > > Yen-Ju > > > > > > > I also want to put a prototype of CoreObject in 0.3. The current > > > EtoileSerialise code now has a working implementation of COProxy, > > > which serialises and stores every message sent to a proxied object. > > > These invocations can now also be re-loaded and re-applied to other > > > objects, allowing complete re-play of an object's lifespan. Adding > > > branching to this will be fairly trivial, and the higher-level parts > > > of CoreObject should be in a useable, if not polished, state in time > > > for 0.3. > > > > > > What else do people want to see in 0.3? Localisation might also be > > > on the list; see if we can start getting things translated a bit? > > > > > > David > > > > > > [1] Jesse want's to call 0.3 'Charm,' as in 'three's the charm,' and > > > 'what a charming user environment you have there.' I don't have any > > > objection, as long as we don't end up with names as silly as the > > > Ubuntu releases. > > > > I don't really like such "code name" like 'Charm', or 'Ubuntu Dapper', > > 'Edgy', or Gnome "Whatever you want to say" release. > > First, I never remember which one is which version. > > Second, it make searching more difficult. > > For example, I want to fix my Ubuntu 6.10 for wireless with ppc. > > I not only have to search 6.10, but also 'Dapper' if I remember it right. > > Same as all the cats Apple have. > > It is easy to remember at the beginning, > > but I got lost after there are too many running around. > > > > Yen-Ju > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Etoile-discuss mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Etoile-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-discuss
