Re: GTK2 Themes in GNOME 3
On Sat, 2014-02-15 at 14:11 +0200, alex diavatis wrote: > >Haven't confirmed this myself, but what if you symlink ~/.themes/ to > >~/.local/share/themes ? Then anything installed in > ~/.local/share/themes > >would also be accessible from ~/.themes/ > > > That is a bad workaround. > > > 1. Tweak will still dublicating themes (Stowers?) > 2. GNOME-Shell User Extension uses ~./themes for Shell Themes. I know > that Shell Themes aren't officially supported from GNOME but.. > (Giovanni?) Then the solution would be to have all themes in just one place in the home directory (including gnome-shell themes) and read from one location, i.e. XDG directory. So if the user-themes extensions used the XDG location, then have gnome-tweak-tool just use that directory. Just my 2¢. - Ikey > > > This is not complaining or something, but I think is a > really unnecessary bug (in gtk2), which I haven't the skills to fix it > my self. > > > Thank you > > > - alex > > > On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Michael Ikey Doherty > wrote: > On Sat, 2014-02-15 at 11:29 +0200, alex diavatis wrote: > > Hello, > > > > > > GNOME 3 GTK3 theme specifications point that themes > (user-specific) > > should be installed under ~/.local/share/themes. > > That won't work for GTK2, and GTK2 themes are required to be > installed > > in ~/.themes > > > > > > This is a known bug in bugzilla.gnome (cant find #) and GTK2 > themes > > should be accessible under ~/.local/share/themes also. > > > > > > Installing a theme (GTK2 & GTK3) both in ~./.themes and > > ~./local/share/themes makes Tweak Tool to show themes twice. > > > > > > In my opinion this is also a security regression since users > should > > use root access for installing themes (!!) under > ~/usr/share/themes. > > When "users", add several scripts and programs that install > themes. > > > > > > This bug is over a year, and I know GTK2 is not actively > developed, > > but there are still many GTK2 apps. > > > > > > Any solutions for installing GTK (2&3) themes under GNOME3, > without > > root privileges? > > > > Haven't confirmed this myself, but what if you symlink > ~/.themes/ to > ~/.local/share/themes ? Then anything installed in > ~/.local/share/themes > would also be accessible from ~/.themes/ > > - Ikey Doherty > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > - alex > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > desktop-devel-list mailing list > > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > > > - > Intel Corporation (UK) Limited > Registered No. 1134945 (England) > Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ > VAT No: 860 2173 47 > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential > material for > the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or > distribution > by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended > recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. > > - Intel Corporation (UK) Limited Registered No. 1134945 (England) Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ VAT No: 860 2173 47 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GTK2 Themes in GNOME 3
>Haven't confirmed this myself, but what if you symlink ~/.themes/ to >~/.local/share/themes ? Then anything installed in ~/.local/share/themes >would also be accessible from ~/.themes/ That is a bad workaround. 1. Tweak will still dublicating themes (Stowers?) 2. GNOME-Shell User Extension uses ~./themes for Shell Themes. I know that Shell Themes aren't officially supported from GNOME but.. (Giovanni?) This is not complaining or something, but I think is a really unnecessary bug (in gtk2), which I haven't the skills to fix it my self. Thank you - alex On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Michael Ikey Doherty < michael.i.dohe...@intel.com> wrote: > On Sat, 2014-02-15 at 11:29 +0200, alex diavatis wrote: > > Hello, > > > > > > GNOME 3 GTK3 theme specifications point that themes (user-specific) > > should be installed under ~/.local/share/themes. > > That won't work for GTK2, and GTK2 themes are required to be installed > > in ~/.themes > > > > > > This is a known bug in bugzilla.gnome (cant find #) and GTK2 themes > > should be accessible under ~/.local/share/themes also. > > > > > > Installing a theme (GTK2 & GTK3) both in ~./.themes and > > ~./local/share/themes makes Tweak Tool to show themes twice. > > > > > > In my opinion this is also a security regression since users should > > use root access for installing themes (!!) under ~/usr/share/themes. > > When "users", add several scripts and programs that install themes. > > > > > > This bug is over a year, and I know GTK2 is not actively developed, > > but there are still many GTK2 apps. > > > > > > Any solutions for installing GTK (2&3) themes under GNOME3, without > > root privileges? > > > Haven't confirmed this myself, but what if you symlink ~/.themes/ to > ~/.local/share/themes ? Then anything installed in ~/.local/share/themes > would also be accessible from ~/.themes/ > > - Ikey Doherty > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > - alex > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > desktop-devel-list mailing list > > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > > > - > Intel Corporation (UK) Limited > Registered No. 1134945 (England) > Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ > VAT No: 860 2173 47 > > This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for > the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution > by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended > recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GTK2 Themes in GNOME 3
On Sat, 2014-02-15 at 11:29 +0200, alex diavatis wrote: > Hello, > > > GNOME 3 GTK3 theme specifications point that themes (user-specific) > should be installed under ~/.local/share/themes. > That won't work for GTK2, and GTK2 themes are required to be installed > in ~/.themes > > > This is a known bug in bugzilla.gnome (cant find #) and GTK2 themes > should be accessible under ~/.local/share/themes also. > > > Installing a theme (GTK2 & GTK3) both in ~./.themes and > ~./local/share/themes makes Tweak Tool to show themes twice. > > > In my opinion this is also a security regression since users should > use root access for installing themes (!!) under ~/usr/share/themes. > When "users", add several scripts and programs that install themes. > > > This bug is over a year, and I know GTK2 is not actively developed, > but there are still many GTK2 apps. > > > Any solutions for installing GTK (2&3) themes under GNOME3, without > root privileges? > Haven't confirmed this myself, but what if you symlink ~/.themes/ to ~/.local/share/themes ? Then anything installed in ~/.local/share/themes would also be accessible from ~/.themes/ - Ikey Doherty > > Thank you > > > - alex > > > > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list - Intel Corporation (UK) Limited Registered No. 1134945 (England) Registered Office: Pipers Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ VAT No: 860 2173 47 This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
GTK2 Themes in GNOME 3
Hello, GNOME 3 GTK3 theme specifications point that themes (user-specific) should be installed under ~/.local/share/themes. That won't work for GTK2, and GTK2 themes are required to be installed in ~/.themes This is a known bug in bugzilla.gnome (cant find #) and GTK2 themes should be accessible under ~/.local/share/themes also. Installing a theme (GTK2 & GTK3) both in ~./.themes and ~./local/share/themes makes Tweak Tool to show themes twice. In my opinion this is also a security regression since users should use root access for installing themes (!!) under ~/usr/share/themes. When "users", add several scripts and programs that install themes. This bug is over a year, and I know GTK2 is not actively developed, but there are still many GTK2 apps. Any solutions for installing GTK (2&3) themes under GNOME3, without root privileges? Thank you - alex ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [totem] Created branch gnome-3-10
Em Sun, 2013-07-28 às 18:07 +, Bastien Nocera escreveu: > The branch 'gnome-3-10' was created pointing to: > > 08c1767... rotation: Don't check rotation for DVDs either Unfortunately, I don't think I'll have time to finish the work on Videos for GNOME 3.10, so I've branched off gnome-3-8 instead. The current GNOME 3.8 branch contains loads of bug fixes that were backported from master, including: - Restored streaming from Vimeo - VA-API support - Bug fixes for videos on remote shares - Better playback and buffering for videos on remote shares Interested folks can take a look at the master branch, and the bugs listed with the 3.12 whiteboard status: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/buglist.cgi?status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr;query_format=advanced;status_whiteboard=3.12;bug_status=UNCONFIRMED;bug_status=NEW;bug_status=ASSIGNED;bug_status=REOPENED;product=totem There's a few low-hanging fruits there. Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
>> For me Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN is to browse in order the tabs. Alt+Tab has always >> carried more a "recently used", or "history" semantic, so I don't think >> they're the same. Hmm. Sounds sane! > Just saw you're right, some applications are already implementing > Ctrl+Tab that way, like Firefox and Thunderbird. Looks like I have an > unusual expectation on the semantics bewind the Tab key. Also correct. At least, Ctrl+Tab and Ctrl+Shift+Tab should work. Similiar to Alt+Tab and Alt+Shift+Tab, so your "recently used" approach sounds nice. On the other side, a lot of people will expect the "Firefox/Chrome/Thunderbird"-Semantic. But using Ctrl+Tabs as "recently used tab" sounds pretty :-) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
Le 19/06/2013 12:56, Luis Menina a écrit : > Le 18/06/2013 10:40, bugs a écrit : >> What can be improved is the key-combination for switching between the >> tabs. For a weird, unknown reason, we don't rely on Ctrl+Tab for switching >> between tabs in most applications. That will fit much more in the >> expectations of the users, than Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN or even worse >> Ctrl+Shift+PGUP/PGDN. Furthermore it will follow the convention of Alt+Tab >> and is also more "keyboard-friendly". Hitting Ctrl+Tab is easier than >> searching Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN, especially since a lot of manufacturers started >> to move around PGUP/PGDN (most ot them seem to search a ideal place for >> it...). >> >> e.g. Ctrl+Tab/Ctrl+Shift+Tab could be used aside of Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN, which >> won't hurt people how are already aware of the current behaviour of GNOME. > > For me Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN is to browse in order the tabs. Alt+Tab has always > carried more a "recently used", or "history" semantic, so I don't think > they're the same. Just saw you're right, some applications are already implementing Ctrl+Tab that way, like Firefox and Thunderbird. Looks like I have an unusual expectation on the semantics bewind the Tab key. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
Le 18/06/2013 10:40, bugs a écrit : > What can be improved is the key-combination for switching between the > tabs. For a weird, unknown reason, we don't rely on Ctrl+Tab for switching > between tabs in most applications. That will fit much more in the > expectations of the users, than Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN or even worse > Ctrl+Shift+PGUP/PGDN. Furthermore it will follow the convention of Alt+Tab > and is also more "keyboard-friendly". Hitting Ctrl+Tab is easier than > searching Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN, especially since a lot of manufacturers started > to move around PGUP/PGDN (most ot them seem to search a ideal place for > it...). > > e.g. Ctrl+Tab/Ctrl+Shift+Tab could be used aside of Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN, which > won't hurt people how are already aware of the current behaviour of GNOME. For me Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN is to browse in order the tabs. Alt+Tab has always carried more a "recently used", or "history" semantic, so I don't think they're the same. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:38:56 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > hi Luis; > > On 17 June 2013 17:09, Luis Menina wrote: > >> I also whish one could cycle through the tabs of a tabbed application >> using just Alt+Tab too, gnome shell handling the tabs, to find the tab >> of the same application I was using 5s ago. > > you really, *really* don't want this. > > I currently have two Firefox windows open, the first with 41 tabs > (after I did a couple rounds of garbage collection, last night I was > at around 70), the other with ~50 tabs. then I have four or five > terminal instances, and within each I have between 3 and 7 tabs. tabs > are cheaper than windows, so people *do* use a ton of those. the > selector would become incredibly tiny, and hard to navigate — > *especially* on low-resolution displays like a netbook. Absolutely correct. What can be improved is the key-combination for switching between the tabs. For a weird, unknown reason, we don't rely on Ctrl+Tab for switching between tabs in most applications. That will fit much more in the expectations of the users, than Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN or even worse Ctrl+Shift+PGUP/PGDN. Furthermore it will follow the convention of Alt+Tab and is also more "keyboard-friendly". Hitting Ctrl+Tab is easier than searching Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN, especially since a lot of manufacturers started to move around PGUP/PGDN (most ot them seem to search a ideal place for it...). e.g. Ctrl+Tab/Ctrl+Shift+Tab could be used aside of Ctrl+PGUP/PGDN, which won't hurt people how are already aware of the current behaviour of GNOME. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
Hi Emmanuele, Le 17/06/2013 18:38, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit : On 17 June 2013 17:09, Luis Menina wrote: I also whish one could cycle through the tabs of a tabbed application using just Alt+Tab too, gnome shell handling the tabs, to find the tab of the same application I was using 5s ago. you really, *really* don't want this. I currently have two Firefox windows open, the first with 41 tabs (after I did a couple rounds of garbage collection, last night I was at around 70), the other with ~50 tabs. then I have four or five terminal instances, and within each I have between 3 and 7 tabs. tabs are cheaper than windows, so people *do* use a ton of those. the selector would become incredibly tiny, and hard to navigate — *especially* on low-resolution displays like a netbook. YMMV. I don't use many tabs at once, a few for terminals. A dozen for firefox. Once all tabs don't fit on the tab bar, there are too many of them for me. But I totally understand your point. This is not for the previews in the shell that I miss that, but more for Alt+Tab, though for consistency's sake, both features would be impacted. Just forget it. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
I agree we shouldn't scroll through tabs with Alt-Tab, but I can understand where the problem comes from. Very frequently I click on a link in Evolution or "open containing folder" or a file downloaded with Epiphany, and instead of having a new Nautilus/Epiphany tab open, the result is a whole new window. This is very annoying and creates multiple windows. Another problem is exactly that multi-multi-multi-tab problem: You have tons of tabs. Me too. Sometimes I have two Epiphany windows, just so that I can split the tabs into "categories". If we could categorize tabs or have them in a hierarchical structure in the app itself, we'd have less mess on the desktop. I think the points mentioned are worth a thought and some clever design. I believe Gnome is going in the right direction, but focusing on a single source of content is good only for the simple home user / content consumer. When working, one needs to be able to work with many windows and tabs effectively. To be honest, I've been using Gnome 3.4.2 for a while, and no later version, so I don't know how later versions changed the UI. On ב', 2013-06-17 at 17:38 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > hi Luis; > > On 17 June 2013 17:09, Luis Menina wrote: > > > I also whish one could cycle through the tabs of a tabbed application > > using just Alt+Tab too, gnome shell handling the tabs, to find the tab > > of the same application I was using 5s ago. > > you really, *really* don't want this. > > I currently have two Firefox windows open, the first with 41 tabs > (after I did a couple rounds of garbage collection, last night I was > at around 70), the other with ~50 tabs. then I have four or five > terminal instances, and within each I have between 3 and 7 tabs. tabs > are cheaper than windows, so people *do* use a ton of those. the > selector would become incredibly tiny, and hard to navigate — > *especially* on low-resolution displays like a netbook. > > ciao, > Emmanuele. > > -- > W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name > B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
hi Luis; On 17 June 2013 17:09, Luis Menina wrote: > I also whish one could cycle through the tabs of a tabbed application > using just Alt+Tab too, gnome shell handling the tabs, to find the tab > of the same application I was using 5s ago. you really, *really* don't want this. I currently have two Firefox windows open, the first with 41 tabs (after I did a couple rounds of garbage collection, last night I was at around 70), the other with ~50 tabs. then I have four or five terminal instances, and within each I have between 3 and 7 tabs. tabs are cheaper than windows, so people *do* use a ton of those. the selector would become incredibly tiny, and hard to navigate — *especially* on low-resolution displays like a netbook. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
Hi, Le 30/05/2013 17:52, אנטולי קרסנר a écrit : > This is a lot of open windows, so I group them into workspaces. But it > doesn't help, I still feel too inefficient sometimes, and I'd like to > know how I can improve my desktop worflow and usage. You're not alone. I still have trouble getting the right window in the foreground. I use GNOME on a netbook (1024×600), and on a desktop with a 16/9 screen. I like to always have my windows maximized. Window selection using mouse = I have the « there are several windows of the same application open, and they look alike » problem. 50% of the time, I click on the wrong one. This has been somewhat improved on 3.8 with the bigger previews but doesn't competely fix the problem. Sometimes that's even the wrong app, but the preview is similar enough (heck, everything look grey-ish) that I get confused and select the wrong one. I miss the icon of the application on the preview. Window selection using keyboard === I very often use Alt+Tab to select my windows. A frequent use case is: 1. use application A 2. switch to application B (email, something else) 3. switch back to application A and resume my previous task This is currently something very tedious, especially when both applications are on different workspaces. Ideally, I see the Alt+Tab stuff like a queue of frequently selected windows. This means that the windows I often switch to should never be more than 2 or 3 keystrokes away. It's also easier for me to remember if I used that window long ago or just a few seconds before, than remembering how many applications I have on a specific desktop until I reach the window I'm looking for. Using the key above tab to cycle between windows of the same application isn't a solution either I think. I often find myself using Alt+Tab, seeing it was a mistake, pressing Alt+Tab again to go to the right application, then pressing Alt+key-above-tab. We shouldn't have to actually "think" to use something so deeply wired as Alt+Tab for the "get me back the Window I was working on 5s ago" thing. I also whish one could cycle through the tabs of a tabbed application using just Alt+Tab too, gnome shell handling the tabs, to find the tab of the same application I was using 5s ago. My 2 cents... -- Luis Menina ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 06:52:01PM +0300, אנטולי קרסנר wrote: > > > The question is, how can I improve that? Switching between windows, > especially on different workspaces, becomes very slow. I tried using alt > +tab, but when I hold alt+tab for too long, the marker starts running > through the list of windows and I can't efficiently click on the one I > want. > > > Oops, wait a second! I just tried the alt+tab keys again, and now it > seems I was rejecting them too easily... I think it can work for me :) > > But anyway, is there some workflow you recommend for programming? I have > one 15.6' screen and I need many windows open. Maybe there's some > keyboard-driven approach which I and other people should be more aware > of. > Hi, My workflow is similar to yours. Maybe I don't have so many windows open, but I use separate workspaces for programming and non-programming related tasks. I use Alt+Tab to switch between them. By default Alt+Tab displays all applications from all workspaces. If you have many apps on many workspaces, it interferes with your current activity on current workspace, so I made small extension: https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/310/alt-tab-workspace/ It displays only apps and windows from active workspace, so if I have 3 apps on my programming workspace, I can quickly Alt+Tab through them. Maybe it's not sane default for gnome-shell, but you may find it useful, if separate your tasks on different workspaces. > I really think Gnome 3 can be great and more people can find it useful. > It's just a matter of knowing how to use it efficiently. So if you have > any advice for me, it's very welcome :) > > Look for other extensions as well. There are chances that people faced similar problems with their workflow and solved them with extensions. Regards, Krzysztof ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
On Thu, 2013-05-30 at 18:52 +0300, אנטולי קרסנר wrote: > Hello, > Hi, > I've been using Gnome 3.4.2 for long time. I started using Gnome 3 > because I believe in innovation and evolution through trial and error. > But I noticed a problematic recurring pattern in my usage of my laptop > (I don't carry it anywhere, and it's has a large screen, so it can be > considered like a desktop computer). > > When I work, especially when I program, I have many windows open: > > Gedit for source code (I know, I know, I should start using an IDE) > Devhelp > Epiphany window for programming-related pages > Epiphany window for other pages (webmail, social network, etc.) > Nautilus, with 2-4 several tabs open, maybe also 2 windows > Gnome Terminal window, with the working directory being my git repo > Gnome Terminal window for compiling short experiment programs I write > Evolution > Empathy > Transmission > I'm not sure why you should start using IDE? Different people use different tools (I use both gedit and emacs for programming on Gnome). > This is a lot of open windows, so I group them into workspaces. But it > doesn't help, I still feel too inefficient sometimes, and I'd like to > know how I can improve my desktop worflow and usage. > > A typical workspace arrangement I use is listed in the bottom of this > message. > > The problems I encounter: > > 1. When I need to switch between windows in the same workspace, I take > the mouse cursor to the corner of the screen, then click on the window I > want to see. > > 2. When I need to switch between windows in different workspaces, I move > the mouse cursor to the corner of the window, then move it to the > workspace sidebar, click on the one I want, then click on the window I > want. > I am not a designer but for me the most convenient way is: 1. Ctrl+Alt+Up/Down to switch between workspaces 2. Use always on top + mutters tiling features to have windows I need to be opened at the same time. Say terminal window pinned to corner over documentation (using always on top) or evince and gedit side by side. (I believe 'always on top' is the killer feature of Linux for power users - even my friends using Windows/Mac OS X did agreed that it would be useful add-on). Best regards ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Switching Between Applications in Gnome 3
Hello, I've been using Gnome 3.4.2 for long time. I started using Gnome 3 because I believe in innovation and evolution through trial and error. But I noticed a problematic recurring pattern in my usage of my laptop (I don't carry it anywhere, and it's has a large screen, so it can be considered like a desktop computer). When I work, especially when I program, I have many windows open: Gedit for source code (I know, I know, I should start using an IDE) Devhelp Epiphany window for programming-related pages Epiphany window for other pages (webmail, social network, etc.) Nautilus, with 2-4 several tabs open, maybe also 2 windows Gnome Terminal window, with the working directory being my git repo Gnome Terminal window for compiling short experiment programs I write Evolution Empathy Transmission This is a lot of open windows, so I group them into workspaces. But it doesn't help, I still feel too inefficient sometimes, and I'd like to know how I can improve my desktop worflow and usage. A typical workspace arrangement I use is listed in the bottom of this message. The problems I encounter: 1. When I need to switch between windows in the same workspace, I take the mouse cursor to the corner of the screen, then click on the window I want to see. 2. When I need to switch between windows in different workspaces, I move the mouse cursor to the corner of the window, then move it to the workspace sidebar, click on the one I want, then click on the window I want. 3. Sometimes using the mouse is faster than thinking, so I have the following problem with Nautilus and Epiphany: since more than one window is open, very often I click on an Epiphany or Nautilus window in the overview, and when it fully appears on the screen I realize it's the wrong window and go to the other one. It happens because I click before I start thinking which workspace is the active one... maybe just because I have many tabs and may pages open. The question is, how can I improve that? Switching between windows, especially on different workspaces, becomes very slow. I tried using alt +tab, but when I hold alt+tab for too long, the marker starts running through the list of windows and I can't efficiently click on the one I want. Oops, wait a second! I just tried the alt+tab keys again, and now it seems I was rejecting them too easily... I think it can work for me :) But anyway, is there some workflow you recommend for programming? I have one 15.6' screen and I need many windows open. Maybe there's some keyboard-driven approach which I and other people should be more aware of. I really think Gnome 3 can be great and more people can find it useful. It's just a matter of knowing how to use it efficiently. So if you have any advice for me, it's very welcome :) Anatoly Here's a typical workspace setup I use: * Personal workspace: Epiphany window for non-programming pages Nautilus with non-programming folders open as tabs * Programming workspace 1 Gedit Devhelp Epiphany window for programming-related pages Gnome Terminal window, with the working directory being my git repo Nautilus with programming related folders open as tabs * Programming workspace 2 Gnome Terminal window for compiling short experiment programs I write Sometimes Evince (for PDF files), filer-roller for tarballs * Network/communication workspace Evolution Empathy Transmission ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Porting GNOME to Wayland NFS performance in GNOME 3
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 12:48:40AM +0100, stefan skoglund(agj) wrote: > The RedHat thing is a really longlived bug in redhats bugzilla about > gvfs metadata induced overload of NFS servers. That bug is rather bad > and i think that if it isn't resolved it will make GNOME3 impossible to > run in NFS-environments. Could you please stop using vague phrases like 'RedHat thing'. I have no idea what you're talking about. Either be specific, or just stop. It seems you're referring to GNOME, which is not a 'RedHat thing'. But actually I have no clue at all what you're suggesting with that. I am pretty sure that you're wrong though. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Porting GNOME to Wayland NFS performance in GNOME 3
mån 2013-03-18 klockan 09:10 -0700 skrev Sriram Ramkrishna: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 7:58 AM, stefan skoglund(agj) wrote: > fre 2013-03-15 klockan 14:32 -0400 skrev Matthias Clasen: > > > I dont think Redhat wants to have the same type of > conversation they had > with an client about GVFS bad behaviour when running over NFS > if an > wayland compositor is sensitive to the same type of race > condition as > gvfsd. > > > > In general, using NFS is a bad idea for a desktop in any case. As you > say there is any number of conditions due to locking that could cause > race conditions. > > > OR is the gnome community of the belief that NFS-accessed home > directories is obsolete ? > The race condition in gvfsd can be triggered in the use case > of a single > user desktop on a single machine but said machine needs to be > heavily > loaded. > > > > Speaking of someone who has been in a very large enterprise > environment where our home directories were all NFS mounted, we never > ran into these issues. Why? Because we all ran fvwm and not a full > blown desktop OS. > I have a university lab setup with gnome 3.6 desktop environment in debian wheezy and Kerberized NFS-access to the home directory (the server is a Nexenta Appliance.) It is enough to say that login performance is abysmal. I think this steems from the heavy usage of dconf at login-time (at least 1 minute from login in gdm to a working desktop.) This is on 4 year old HP AMD64 hardware and intel i745 (?) hardware. I occasionally also have a bit of trouble with Pulseaudio's .pulse directory in this environment. A pristine KDE in the same setup has very nice login performance so do enlightenment (of course.) The RedHat thing is a really longlived bug in redhats bugzilla about gvfs metadata induced overload of NFS servers. That bug is rather bad and i think that if it isn't resolved it will make GNOME3 impossible to run in NFS-environments. I hope that Weston (for example) doesn't create a situation like that but i'm pessimistic. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Porting GNOME to Wayland NFS performance in GNOME 3
We have a gnome-integration list dedicated to integrating GNOME into environments. That would be a great place to discuss and figure it out. I'd like to see if we can make GNOME better in environments like yours. Login performance is slow even without NFS. Boot up performance to GDM seems to work pretty good. But after that, it has sucked ass. I refer you to this; https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/2012-May/msg00089.html on trying to find some real values on debugging the slow start up. I fear though that is out of topic for this mailing list. So follow ups to gnome-integration would be appreciated. sri On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 4:48 PM, stefan skoglund(agj) < stefan.skogl...@agj.net> wrote: > mån 2013-03-18 klockan 09:10 -0700 skrev Sriram Ramkrishna: > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 7:58 AM, stefan skoglund(agj) > wrote: > > fre 2013-03-15 klockan 14:32 -0400 skrev Matthias Clasen: > > > > > > I dont think Redhat wants to have the same type of > > conversation they had > > with an client about GVFS bad behaviour when running over NFS > > if an > > wayland compositor is sensitive to the same type of race > > condition as > > gvfsd. > > > > > > > > In general, using NFS is a bad idea for a desktop in any case. As you > > say there is any number of conditions due to locking that could cause > > race conditions. > > > > > > OR is the gnome community of the belief that NFS-accessed home > > directories is obsolete ? > > The race condition in gvfsd can be triggered in the use case > > of a single > > user desktop on a single machine but said machine needs to be > > heavily > > loaded. > > > > > > > > Speaking of someone who has been in a very large enterprise > > environment where our home directories were all NFS mounted, we never > > ran into these issues. Why? Because we all ran fvwm and not a full > > blown desktop OS. > > > > I have a university lab setup with gnome 3.6 desktop environment in > debian wheezy and Kerberized NFS-access to the home directory (the > server is a Nexenta Appliance.) It is enough to say that login > performance is abysmal. I think this steems from the heavy usage of > dconf at login-time (at least 1 minute from login in gdm to a working > desktop.) This is on 4 year old HP AMD64 hardware and intel i745 (?) > hardware. > > I occasionally also have a bit of trouble with Pulseaudio's .pulse > directory in this environment. > > A pristine KDE in the same setup has very nice login performance so do > enlightenment (of course.) > > The RedHat thing is a really longlived bug in redhats bugzilla about > gvfs metadata induced overload of NFS servers. That bug is rather bad > and i think that if it isn't resolved it will make GNOME3 impossible to > run in NFS-environments. > I hope that Weston (for example) doesn't create a situation like that > but i'm pessimistic. > > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Sharing widgets between GNOME 3 applications
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 13:45 +, Debarshi Ray wrote: > The newly designed (or redesigned) GNOME 3 applications have some > common UI elements. For example, if you look at the following designs, > you will notice that the main toolbar, "selection" toolbar, main icon > view, etc. are quite similar: + > https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Boxes + > https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Documents + > https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Photos > > We may benefit from having a way to share these widgets among the > applications. Currently, what I have been doing, for gnome-photos, is > to copy-paste the *.c/*.h files from the gnome-documents tree. > > One downside of doing this is that the gnome-photos binary has some > dead code which will never be executed. For example the code path that > implements the "list view" for Documents, which is not necessary for > Photos. So all the classes implementing it need to be copied over into > the gnome-photos tree to avoid maintaining a fork of the GdMainView > widget. > > Currently it is not so much of a practical problem, but I am curious > to know if people have better ideas about this. If you write any new custom widgets, feel free to add them to: https://live.gnome.org/Design/Whiteboards/CustomAppWidgets See also 2 widgets I'm trying to get added to GTK+: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=652809 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=668013 Cheers ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Sharing widgets between GNOME 3 applications
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 11:54 -0400, Erick Pérez Castellanos wrote: > The way I see it, is that we need to provide some widgets to do the > stuff following the guldelines of the new Gnome Design > As Allan says here [1], there's a new kind of toolbar, which have some > stuff in common, and it will be worthy to look into the possibility of > make a specific widget for it, and the sames goes for those new kinds of > iconviews, and for the selection patterns as well. > > [1](http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/a-new-approach-to-gnome-application-design/) Obviously the long term goal is to have a solid design language coupled with Gtk+/Clutter features that makes it easy to use, but while the design is being evolved we don't want to risk putting too much into the core platform, as anything there are highly frozen and API/ABI stable. So, i think sharing code by different means is the best approach for now. The git subtree stuff seems like a good candidate for this. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Sharing widgets between GNOME 3 applications
The way I see it, is that we need to provide some widgets to do the stuff following the guldelines of the new Gnome Design As Allan says here [1], there's a new kind of toolbar, which have some stuff in common, and it will be worthy to look into the possibility of make a specific widget for it, and the sames goes for those new kinds of iconviews, and for the selection patterns as well. [1](http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/2012/02/10/a-new-approach-to-gnome-application-design/) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Sharing widgets between GNOME 3 applications
>> The newly designed (or redesigned) GNOME 3 applications have some >> common UI elements. For example, if you look at the following designs, >> you will notice that the main toolbar, "selection" toolbar, main icon >> view, etc. are quite similar: > > Sorry for being so naive but why couldn't this be part of GTK+? The applications are young, the designs are young, which means they are still evolving. Putting them in GTK+ is risky because of API/ABI guarantees. Happy hacking, Debarshi -- Give a man ssh access, he'll still need a computer. Give him a computer, he'll give ssh access to you. -- Ashish Shukla pgpT4TQPcZFpf.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Sharing widgets between GNOME 3 applications
Hi, On Mon, May 7, 2012 at 3:45 PM, Debarshi Ray wrote: > The newly designed (or redesigned) GNOME 3 applications have some > common UI elements. For example, if you look at the following designs, > you will notice that the main toolbar, "selection" toolbar, main icon > view, etc. are quite similar: Sorry for being so naive but why couldn't this be part of GTK+? -- Alexandre Franke ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Sharing widgets between GNOME 3 applications
Hey Debarshi, On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 13:45 +, Debarshi Ray wrote: > We may benefit from having a way to share these widgets among the > applications. Currently, what I have been doing, for gnome-photos, is > to copy-paste the *.c/*.h files from the gnome-documents tree. > > One downside of doing this is that the gnome-photos binary has some > dead code which will never be executed. For example the code path that > implements the "list view" for Documents, which is not necessary for > Photos. So all the classes implementing it need to be copied over into > the gnome-photos tree to avoid maintaining a fork of the GdMainView > widget. > > Currently it is not so much of a practical problem, but I am curious > to know if people have better ideas about this. Yeah, I agree we could do better. I don't think another shared library would be the best solution though; maybe a better approach could be splitting these common bits in a separate git module and have projects import it using git submodule [1] (or git subtree? [2]). This way, maintenance of the common bits could still be managed in a single place, and different projects could even depend on different revisions of the shared code if they want (I believe if we use git subtree this could go as far as even maintaining an additional patchset on top of the shared tree). What do you think? [1] http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Submodules [2] http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Tools-Subtree-Merging ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Sharing widgets between GNOME 3 applications
The newly designed (or redesigned) GNOME 3 applications have some common UI elements. For example, if you look at the following designs, you will notice that the main toolbar, "selection" toolbar, main icon view, etc. are quite similar: + https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Boxes + https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Documents + https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Photos We may benefit from having a way to share these widgets among the applications. Currently, what I have been doing, for gnome-photos, is to copy-paste the *.c/*.h files from the gnome-documents tree. One downside of doing this is that the gnome-photos binary has some dead code which will never be executed. For example the code path that implements the "list view" for Documents, which is not necessary for Photos. So all the classes implementing it need to be copied over into the gnome-photos tree to avoid maintaining a fork of the GdMainView widget. Currently it is not so much of a practical problem, but I am curious to know if people have better ideas about this. Happy hacking, Debarshi -- Give a man ssh access, he'll still need a computer. Give him a computer, he'll give ssh access to you. -- Ashish Shukla pgpeAbZEigTlR.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Gnome 3 issues
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 5:18 PM, Emmanuel Pacaud wrote: > Wouldn't it be better to make replace the PgDown > sequence. PgUp/PgDown are the standard GNOME shortcuts for switching between tabs, so I don't think removing them is a good idea. Obviously we could add left/right as additional shortcuts here[0], but note that there is a GSOC project to change how the application view is triggered[0], which makes those shortcuts kinda obsolete. Regards, Florian [0] those might conflict with (currently unimplemented) windows keynav though [1] http://jimmac.musichall.cz/log/?p=1181 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Gnome 3 issues
- Mensaje original - > De: Juanjo Marín > Para: surma ; "desktop-devel-list@gnome.org" > > CC: > Enviado: Jueves 3 de Mayo de 2012 18:23 > Asunto: Re: Gnome 3 issues > >it is totally functional IMHO. > BTW, I recommend GNOME 3.4, previous versions had some issues in my experience. > > You don't need gconf to switch to the fallback mode. Go to > > System Settings > Graphics > Forced fallback mode > System Settings > Details > Graphics > Forced fallback mode ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Gnome 3 issues
>Why did you screw up gnome menus? >I've been using gnome since 2000, and it >has been the best desktop available until gnome 3 >came. I had a terrible car accident 31. Dets 2005, >which caused me to spend 6 months in coma. >That messed up my hands and I can't use mouse. >That is why I liked gnome 2, everything could be done >without mouse. >And strange is ... why does virtualbox have normal >menus, but real PC has this big mouse controlled >menu?? >VBox gnome 3: http://www.hot.ee/surma/Vbox_gnome3.jpg >But real computers have this crappy menu: >http://blog.fpmurphy.com/blog-images/gnome3cust1-40.png Hi Surma ! GNOME shell can be navigated using only the keyboard. Please, read https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet to to know how to use it. I was using only the keyboard when I read this email, so I know it can be used. I think shortcuts so some functions could a good idea, but it is totally functional IMHO. >Here's an idea: >Maake it so, under gonf-editor you can choose the layout of the menu. >-Surma You don't need gconf to switch to the fallback mode. Go to System Settings > Graphics > Forced fallback mode Cheers, -- Juanjo Marin ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Gnome 3 issues
Le jeudi 03 mai 2012 à 16:56 +0200, Florian Müllner a écrit : > That messed up my hands and I can't use mouse. > That is why I liked gnome 2, everything could be done > without mouse. > > And the same is true for Gnome3 - to navigate to an application, you > can use > PgDown( | | ) Wouldn't it be better to make replace the PgDown sequence. When you enter the overview mode, arrow keys are not used, and it seems more obvious to use them in order to switch between "Window" and "Application" view. Emmanuel. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Gnome 3 issues
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 8:40 AM, surma wrote: > That messed up my hands and I can't use mouse. > That is why I liked gnome 2, everything could be done > without mouse. > And the same is true for Gnome3 - to navigate to an application, you can use PgDown( | | ) (or , select "Applications", ( | | )) Though generally "appname" is a lot faster. Maake it so, under gonf-editor you can choose the layout of the menu. > I encourage you to give the normal Gnome3 experience another shot (personally I actually consider it more keyboard-friendly than Gnome 2), but if you insist, you can force fallback mode (at least for now): System Settings -> Details -> Graphics -> Forced Fallback Mode Regards, Florian ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Gnome 3 issues
On Fri, 2012-04-27 at 09:40 +0300, surma wrote: > Hello, > On to the point. > Why did you screw up gnome menus? > I've > been using gnome since 2000, and it > has been the best desktop > available until gnome 3 > came. I had a terrible car accident 31. Dets > 2005, > which caused me to spend 6 months in coma. > That messed up my > hands and I can't use mouse. > That is why I liked gnome 2, everything > could be done > without mouse. > And strange is ... why does > virtualbox have normal > menus, but real PC has this big mouse > controlled > menu?? > VBox gnome 3: > http://www.hot.ee/surma/Vbox_gnome3.jpg > But real computers have this > crappy > menu: > http://blog.fpmurphy.com/blog-images/gnome3cust1-40.png > Here's > an idea: > Maake it so, under gonf-editor you can choose the layout of > the menu. > -Surma > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing > list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list Hi, I don't know if it is possible for you but you can open application by pressing windows key and entering the name of application (it search the list as you type so you may need to enter just a few first letters - and you can use arrow keys then as well). I believe there was some further work on accessibility on Gnome 3.4. If you are referring to any other menu could you explain what you have on mind? Best regards PS. There are Gnome shell extensions which allow to 'revert' the Gnome 2 look. I don't know how good work they are doing PPS. A really minor point but one you might be interested in - the configuration moved to dconf so changing anything in gconf will not have any effect. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Gnome 3 issues
Hello, On to the point. Why did you screw up gnome menus? I've been using gnome since 2000, and it has been the best desktop available until gnome 3 came. I had a terrible car accident 31. Dets 2005, which caused me to spend 6 months in coma. That messed up my hands and I can't use mouse. That is why I liked gnome 2, everything could be done without mouse. And strange is ... why does virtualbox have normal menus, but real PC has this big mouse controlled menu?? VBox gnome 3: http://www.hot.ee/surma/Vbox_gnome3.jpg But real computers have this crappy menu: http://blog.fpmurphy.com/blog-images/gnome3cust1-40.png Here's an idea: Maake it so, under gonf-editor you can choose the layout of the menu. -Surma___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
Sounds like the issue comes out of text strings referring to the applications, not from copyright/trademark issues with the names themselves. I guess I would recommend this approach: Copyright statement "copyright 2012 Gnome Web Browser" "copyright 2012 Gnome Files" or "copyright 2012 Gnome File Manager" and the other "Open with file manager" or "Open with file browser" After all, isn't this really a matter of context? Also, wouldn't this be similar to Open Office/Libre Office? They use somewhat generic names for the different apps in the suite. I can't imagine that their copyright line for Open Office Writer is "copyright 2012 Writer" can it be? Another example is Apple's apps for OSX: "Mail" "Calendar" "Finder" and they usually identify them as applications rather than the respective nouns by adding ".app" at the end: "Mail.app" "Calendar.app" and "Finder.app". Of course, Linux doesn't have such a specific file extension for user-accessible applications, but I think using "Gnome Mail" and "Apple Mail" would be a very similar solution to the problem. Just my two cents. Jason Simanek ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 09:32 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:20:32AM -0700, Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote: > > On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 08:53 +0200, Luc Pionchon wrote: > > > [...] > > > - copyright notices and such, should the name be so generic? And in > > > translations, should the name be really translated here? Shouldn't it > > > be made more explicit for example with adding "GNOME", like in > > > "Copyright 2012 - the GNOME Developers"? > > > > IMVHO, any of them is a very bad idea. If there is a copyright > > violation there would not be any 'real' copyright holder that could > > complain or sue. Time would be wasted on proving who are the copyright > > holders. > > Trademark issue, not copyright. And you should not be able to trademark > such generic names. With the exception if you are a big company it seems :P I meant GPL violations, which is copyright. -- Germán Póo-Caamaño http://people.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 12:20:32AM -0700, Germán Póo-Caamaño wrote: > On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 08:53 +0200, Luc Pionchon wrote: > > [...] > > - copyright notices and such, should the name be so generic? And in > > translations, should the name be really translated here? Shouldn't it > > be made more explicit for example with adding "GNOME", like in > > "Copyright 2012 - the GNOME Developers"? > > IMVHO, any of them is a very bad idea. If there is a copyright > violation there would not be any 'real' copyright holder that could > complain or sue. Time would be wasted on proving who are the copyright > holders. Trademark issue, not copyright. And you should not be able to trademark such generic names. With the exception if you are a big company it seems :P -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 08:53 +0200, Luc Pionchon wrote: > [...] > - copyright notices and such, should the name be so generic? And in > translations, should the name be really translated here? Shouldn't it > be made more explicit for example with adding "GNOME", like in > "Copyright 2012 - the GNOME Developers"? IMVHO, any of them is a very bad idea. If there is a copyright violation there would not be any 'real' copyright holder that could complain or sue. Time would be wasted on proving who are the copyright holders. IANAL. -- Germán Póo-Caamaño http://people.gnome.org/~gpoo/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
About the name of GNOME 3 core application names / translation
Hello, there is a discussion [1] on the internationalization mailing list about GNOME 3 core application names, the ambiguous situation they bring, and the difficulties it brings for translation. I try to summarize to the best the issue. Read the thread [1] and contact people for more information. The main objective with simple object based application names [2] is understood. It makes a clear link between the application name and the core object it deals with, this with the objective to make meaning for the users. In opposition Nautilus, Epiphany, Evolution does not make meaning for new users. This scheme works very well in an application list, or on a window title. A novice user identifies easily and clearly what it is all about. However it also brings several issues. For example > "Copyright 2003-1012 The Web Developers", which sounds like "Developers of > the World Wide Web". This is even more confusing in French (at least), where "web" (the www) is written "Web" with upper case. See also [3]. > Notifications say "Open with Files" when an external drive is plugged in. It is actually not clear that Files is an application. Therefore the questions : - shall we keep the application names untranslated (like trademarks or person names)? But then we miss out the original goal: make meaning for the users. - shall we use explicit functional names like "File manager", "Web browser"? Everywhere? Or only in places where the meaning is "functional" or where there is less context? (like notifications etc.) - copyright notices and such, should the name be so generic? And in translations, should the name be really translated here? Shouldn't it be made more explicit for example with adding "GNOME", like in "Copyright 2012 - the GNOME Developers"? - Shouldn't we may expect that users (even the users at the lowest imaginable level) are able to remember some application names? - etc. PLEASE NOTE that the issue is not lost in translation, it amplifies in translation. Shorts one-word names can work somehow in English, but can be very awkward and/or ambiguous in various languages. [1] TO: internationalization mailing list Subject: Confusion over epiphany new name Archive: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-i18n/2012-March/msg00078.html [2] https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/ [3] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=671831 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Gnome 3 themes, user overrides?
Benjamin Otte writes:
> I have no idea how all this stuff works, I just know it's kinda suboptimal and
> underdefined[1].
>
> But what I've been doing for modifying my own theme:
>
> mkdir -p ~/.themes/MyTheme/gtk-3.0
> cat > ~/.themes/MyTheme/gtk-3.0/gtk.css << EOF
> @import url("/usr/share/themes/Adwaita/gtk-3.0/gtk.css");
> /* My changes go here */
> EOF
> gsettings set org.gnome.desktop.interface gtk-theme MyTheme
>
> For added fun, you can replace 'MyTheme' with 'Adwaita'.
Thank you very much. This is very useful information.
--
Michael Welsh Duggan
(m...@md5i.com)
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Gnome 3 themes, user overrides?
I have no idea how all this stuff works, I just know it's kinda suboptimal and
underdefined[1].
But what I've been doing for modifying my own theme:
mkdir -p ~/.themes/MyTheme/gtk-3.0
cat > ~/.themes/MyTheme/gtk-3.0/gtk.css << EOF
@import url("/usr/share/themes/Adwaita/gtk-3.0/gtk.css");
/* My changes go here */
EOF
gsettings set org.gnome.desktop.interface gtk-theme MyTheme
For added fun, you can replace 'MyTheme' with 'Adwaita'.
Benjamin
1: I maintain that code.
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Gnome 3 themes, user overrides?
So, Gnome 3 uses a form of CSS for its theming. I'll go ahead and give it a good solid plusplus for that. Easy, understandable customization. Or at least one would think. So, CSS being the nice cascadey thing it is, I should be able to override a theme by placing something in a specific location in my home dir, right? But every reference I find online suggests modifying the themes in /usr/share/themes/ directly... Is this right? I hope not. If it is this way, this seems like a huge oversight. In my case, I am using nautilus on my desktop. But the Adwaita theme's text color doesn't show up very well on my background. So I thought I'd modify it. And that led me to writing this post. Any ideas? -- Michael Welsh Duggan (m...@md5i.com) ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 panel applets
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:03 AM, Narek Babadjanyan wrote: > I have read that the fallback mode is not actively developed, and besides > that who needs fallback if graphics card's drivers are fully supported (at > least in my case it's so), so you are right, I'm talking about the > gnome-shell-extensions. > > Have you tried using some of the alternative panels out there? docky and awn are great alternatives. I use docky myself since GNOME Shell doesn't support ssh'ing to hosts (yet). So there is plenty of room for other utilities that you can use. sri > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Olav Vitters wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 08:25:16PM +0530, Narek Babadjanyan wrote: >> > Hello, hackers! I have recently installed a package gnome-panel-devel >> and I >> > would like to know if it supports GNOME 3's panel, if no :'( , and if >> yes, >> > could you please tell me where is the appropriate documentation? >> >> What do you want to use it for? >> >> GNOME 3 = GNOME shell. It has extensions, but those are not standard. >> Why do you want to add a panel to it? Perhaps someone has a good >> solution for your problem.. (or not, but need to know first:) >> >> >> >> The panel as known from GNOME 2 is still available in the fallback mode. >> You can still develop for it, but I think with your email you're talking >> about GNOME shell, correct? >> -- >> Regards, >> Olav >> > > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 panel applets
> >De: Narek Babadjanyan >Para: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org >Enviado: lunes 12 de septiembre de 2011 16:55 >Asunto: GNOME 3 panel applets > > >Hello, hackers! I have recently installed a package gnome-panel-devel and I >would like to know if it supports GNOME 3's panel, if no :'( , and if yes, >could you please tell me where is the appropriate documentation? Hi Narek, gnome-panel isn't thought to be in used inside gnome-shell. However, I read about a hack for running gnome-panel inside gnome-shell, though It isn't a recommended nor supported option: http://carlosgc.linups.org/gnome/gnome-panel-dock.html The recommended option to modify gnome-shell is through extensions. For example, check the following extensions (I didn't cause I'm fine with vanilla gnome-shell): https://github.com/ahdiaz/gnome-shell-reflection https://github.com/ahdiaz/gnome-shell-windowslist Cheers, -- Juanjo Marin ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 panel applets
I have read that the fallback mode is not actively developed, and besides that who needs fallback if graphics card's drivers are fully supported (at least in my case it's so), so you are right, I'm talking about the gnome-shell-extensions. On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:30 PM, Olav Vitters wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 08:25:16PM +0530, Narek Babadjanyan wrote: > > Hello, hackers! I have recently installed a package gnome-panel-devel and > I > > would like to know if it supports GNOME 3's panel, if no :'( , and if > yes, > > could you please tell me where is the appropriate documentation? > > What do you want to use it for? > > GNOME 3 = GNOME shell. It has extensions, but those are not standard. > Why do you want to add a panel to it? Perhaps someone has a good > solution for your problem.. (or not, but need to know first:) > > > > The panel as known from GNOME 2 is still available in the fallback mode. > You can still develop for it, but I think with your email you're talking > about GNOME shell, correct? > -- > Regards, > Olav > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 panel applets
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 08:25:16PM +0530, Narek Babadjanyan wrote: > Hello, hackers! I have recently installed a package gnome-panel-devel and I > would like to know if it supports GNOME 3's panel, if no :'( , and if yes, > could you please tell me where is the appropriate documentation? What do you want to use it for? GNOME 3 = GNOME shell. It has extensions, but those are not standard. Why do you want to add a panel to it? Perhaps someone has a good solution for your problem.. (or not, but need to know first:) The panel as known from GNOME 2 is still available in the fallback mode. You can still develop for it, but I think with your email you're talking about GNOME shell, correct? -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GNOME 3 panel applets
GNOME3 does not use gnome-panel. You change change GNOME3's top panel with GNOME Shell Extension. On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Narek Babadjanyan wrote: > Hello, hackers! I have recently installed a package gnome-panel-devel and I > would like to know if it supports GNOME 3's panel, if no :'( , and if yes, > could you please tell me where is the appropriate documentation? > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > -- Jasper ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
GNOME 3 panel applets
Hello, hackers! I have recently installed a package gnome-panel-devel and I would like to know if it supports GNOME 3's panel, if no :'( , and if yes, could you please tell me where is the appropriate documentation? ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
2011/9/4 Florian Max : > 2011/9/4 Jasper St. Pierre >> >> Have you seen "Killing Mode Switch"[0]? It wasn't implemented in 3.2 >> because of time constraints, but it's planned. > > The more important reason for not doing it in the 3.2 time frame was that > the design is unfinished (quote Jakub: "don't work on that yet"), but yeah, > the application view as it is now is expected to go away soon. One point though - *don't* drop application categories. No matter than sometimes applications gets categorized strangely it still much better than one complete bowl with all apps thrown in it. This should be kept and improved. And yes, Meta key plus first two or three letters of applications in overview mode is a *killer* feature of GNOME 3 and should be treated as such, with tips for new users how to use it. And contrary, no, mouse is much slower than keyboard anytime, no matter you look at it. Peter. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
2011/9/4 Jasper St. Pierre > Have you seen "Killing Mode Switch"[0]? It wasn't implemented in 3.2 > because of time constraints, but it's planned. > The more important reason for not doing it in the 3.2 time frame was that the design is unfinished (quote Jakub: "don't work on that yet"), but yeah, the application view as it is now is expected to go away soon. Florian ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
Seems awesome! It's definately an improvement over the current way of adding dock bar shortcuts. And it looks great too :) Still I like to navigate through application categories without moving my mouse from corner to corner or click multiple times to find the right application. Maybe we need all of them to improve user experience - an unified and easy way to browse application categories to be used in both the program menu and the dock bar. It better have such pagination and transition features as well as easy mouse hover category drill down option for desktop users. 2011-09-04 (일), 13:09 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre: > Have you seen "Killing Mode Switch"[0]? It wasn't implemented in 3.2 > because of time constraints, but it's planned. > > http://jimmac.musichall.cz/log/?p=1181 > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Xavier Cho wrote: > > Ok, I can admit the overview mode is somewhat more user friendly than > > alt-f2. But still, demanding users to use their keyboard to perform such > > basic task as launching an application is not the way to achieve user > > friendliness. > > > > To be more precise, I suppose all those methods of launching > > applications serve different purpose : > > > > 1) alt-f2 : enable advanced users to execute some command or launch an > > application quickly. > > > > 2) dockbar : enable users to access their most frequently used > > applications. > > > > 3) overview mode : enable users to search for an application with > > keywords. > > > > 4) program menu : enable users to browse through all the available > > applications by categories. > > > > You cannot replace one method with another, rather they are designed to > > complement other methods to enhance user experience. > > > > My point was, the current implementation of 4) requires its users > > unnecessarily cumbersome interactions with their mouse, which could be > > fixed by some simple design modifications. > > > > > > 2011-09-04 (일), 19:38 +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak): > >> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Xavier Cho > >> wrote: > >> > In that case, we can just remove the application menu altogether and let > >> > them alt-f2 type commands to launch applications. > >> > >> Thats not the same thing at all. In case of alt-f2, user has to know > >> the exact and complete name of the application. Where as in overview > >> mode, she/he just > >> types a few letters of either the name of the command or the generic > >> name. For example, typing 'mus' in the overview-mode brings-up > >> rhythmbox as the only option. > >> > > > > > > ___ > > desktop-devel-list mailing list > > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > > > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
Have you seen "Killing Mode Switch"[0]? It wasn't implemented in 3.2 because of time constraints, but it's planned. http://jimmac.musichall.cz/log/?p=1181 On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Xavier Cho wrote: > Ok, I can admit the overview mode is somewhat more user friendly than > alt-f2. But still, demanding users to use their keyboard to perform such > basic task as launching an application is not the way to achieve user > friendliness. > > To be more precise, I suppose all those methods of launching > applications serve different purpose : > > 1) alt-f2 : enable advanced users to execute some command or launch an > application quickly. > > 2) dockbar : enable users to access their most frequently used > applications. > > 3) overview mode : enable users to search for an application with > keywords. > > 4) program menu : enable users to browse through all the available > applications by categories. > > You cannot replace one method with another, rather they are designed to > complement other methods to enhance user experience. > > My point was, the current implementation of 4) requires its users > unnecessarily cumbersome interactions with their mouse, which could be > fixed by some simple design modifications. > > > 2011-09-04 (일), 19:38 +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak): >> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Xavier Cho wrote: >> > In that case, we can just remove the application menu altogether and let >> > them alt-f2 type commands to launch applications. >> >> Thats not the same thing at all. In case of alt-f2, user has to know >> the exact and complete name of the application. Where as in overview >> mode, she/he just >> types a few letters of either the name of the command or the generic >> name. For example, typing 'mus' in the overview-mode brings-up >> rhythmbox as the only option. >> > > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Jasper ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
Ok, I can admit the overview mode is somewhat more user friendly than alt-f2. But still, demanding users to use their keyboard to perform such basic task as launching an application is not the way to achieve user friendliness. To be more precise, I suppose all those methods of launching applications serve different purpose : 1) alt-f2 : enable advanced users to execute some command or launch an application quickly. 2) dockbar : enable users to access their most frequently used applications. 3) overview mode : enable users to search for an application with keywords. 4) program menu : enable users to browse through all the available applications by categories. You cannot replace one method with another, rather they are designed to complement other methods to enhance user experience. My point was, the current implementation of 4) requires its users unnecessarily cumbersome interactions with their mouse, which could be fixed by some simple design modifications. 2011-09-04 (일), 19:38 +0300, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak): > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Xavier Cho wrote: > > In that case, we can just remove the application menu altogether and let > > them alt-f2 type commands to launch applications. > > Thats not the same thing at all. In case of alt-f2, user has to know > the exact and complete name of the application. Where as in overview > mode, she/he just > types a few letters of either the name of the command or the generic > name. For example, typing 'mus' in the overview-mode brings-up > rhythmbox as the only option. > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Xavier Cho wrote: > Thanks for the tip. Though, I already know how to use dash. > > I guess dash/dock is mainly for the applications which used most often, > and categorised application menu is for those applications which is only > occasionally accessed. And even I already have 15 icons on my dock, I > still find myself opening program menu to search for seldom used > applications from time to time. > > On a side note, I really like to see kind of a 'switchable' dock so I > could change set of applications on it according to task currently I'm > on. For example, when I do some music related work, I often use jackd > related applications like ardour, hydrogen, lv2rack and etc. Though > other times, I don't want those icons to clutter my dock, as I rather > want to have more general set of applications at hand, like a web > browser and a terminal, and so on. Some people have suggested workspace presets. The idea is that you have a "Music Production" preset on the dash which contains all those applications, and clicking it would launch all those applications in a new workspace. It's not going to happen for 3.2, unfortunately. > 2011-09-04 (일), 02:10 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre: >> You can pin apps to the dash by dragging them there, or right-click on >> its icon in the dash. >> >> On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Xavier Cho wrote: >> > I've been using Gnome 3 for some months, and overall I think it's >> > definitely >> > a step in the right direction. However, as a long time Gnome 1&2 user, I >> > find it lacking in some aspects in terms of usability and features. >> > Most of all, I think Gnome 3 requires too much user interaction when >> > navigating in the program menu. In the days of global application menu, >> > when >> > you need to launch an application all you need to do was 1) click on the >> > panel menu icon, 2) and navigate by hovering your mouse over the >> > categories, >> > 3) then click on the application. All it needed was 2 clicks and minimal >> > mouse movement. >> > However in Gnome 3, you need first 1) move your mouse to the upper left >> > corner of the screen, 2) and click on the programs menu, 3) wait couple of >> > seconds (especially when you click it for the first time), 4) move your >> > mouse to the opposite end of the screen to click through the application >> > categories, 5) and again move your mouse pointer to where the application >> > is, 6) and finally click on the icon to launch it. >> > In summary, now it requires 3 + number of categories clicks and much more >> > mouse traversal to lauch an application, which I feel a setback in terms of >> > user experience compared to Gnome 1&2. >> > I believe the situation would be much better if we could make the >> > categories >> > traversable by mouse hover instead of clicks, and move the category menu to >> > the left side to make it close to the hot spot on the upper left corner of >> > the screen. And it'd reduce the unnecessary delay if it displays selected >> > few favorite, or most often used applications instead of showing all of >> > them >> > when you click on the program menu. I guess even providing an alternative >> > hot spot, say lower left corner of the screen to access the program menu >> > directly would make it on par with Gnome 2 in terms of mouse clicks needed >> > for an application launch. >> > I suppose the direction Gnome 3 is moving toward is providing a simple, >> > unified desktop environment for variety of devices, including tablets and >> > even smart phones. However, I believe simplicity in software doesn't always >> > lies in 'eliminating' features, but usually in intuitive design and >> > 'hiding' >> > advanced features. >> > Suppose, there's some basic tasks which most of the users performs often - >> > like launching an application from program menu - consists roughly 30% of >> > all desktop features. And there's features which more advanced users need >> > or >> > which are not used frequently, like customizing desktop fonts, would >> > consists another 30% of the features. And finally there's remaining 40% of >> > the features which would rarely be accessed or by expert users or >> > developers. >> > Then you need to make those basic 30% of features readily accessible - no >> > keyboard short cuts, no redundant mouse clicks) in a most intuitive and >> > sim
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 9:25 AM, Xavier Cho wrote: > In that case, we can just remove the application menu altogether and let > them alt-f2 type commands to launch applications. Thats not the same thing at all. In case of alt-f2, user has to know the exact and complete name of the application. Where as in overview mode, she/he just types a few letters of either the name of the command or the generic name. For example, typing 'mus' in the overview-mode brings-up rhythmbox as the only option. -- Regards, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) FSF member#5124 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
On Sun 04 Sep 2011 08:31, Xavier Cho writes: > On a side note, I really like to see kind of a 'switchable' dock so I > could change set of applications on it according to task currently I'm > on. For example, when I do some music related work, I often use jackd > related applications like ardour, hydrogen, lv2rack and etc. Though > other times, I don't want those icons to clutter my dock, as I rather > want to have more general set of applications at hand, like a web > browser and a terminal, and so on. That does sounds like a workflow that gnome-shell doesn't serve well right now. Probably the best way to support it is via an extension, though. Andy -- http://wingolog.org/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
Thanks for the tip. Though, I already know how to use dash. I guess dash/dock is mainly for the applications which used most often, and categorised application menu is for those applications which is only occasionally accessed. And even I already have 15 icons on my dock, I still find myself opening program menu to search for seldom used applications from time to time. On a side note, I really like to see kind of a 'switchable' dock so I could change set of applications on it according to task currently I'm on. For example, when I do some music related work, I often use jackd related applications like ardour, hydrogen, lv2rack and etc. Though other times, I don't want those icons to clutter my dock, as I rather want to have more general set of applications at hand, like a web browser and a terminal, and so on. 2011-09-04 (일), 02:10 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre: > You can pin apps to the dash by dragging them there, or right-click on > its icon in the dash. > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Xavier Cho wrote: > > I've been using Gnome 3 for some months, and overall I think it's definitely > > a step in the right direction. However, as a long time Gnome 1&2 user, I > > find it lacking in some aspects in terms of usability and features. > > Most of all, I think Gnome 3 requires too much user interaction when > > navigating in the program menu. In the days of global application menu, when > > you need to launch an application all you need to do was 1) click on the > > panel menu icon, 2) and navigate by hovering your mouse over the categories, > > 3) then click on the application. All it needed was 2 clicks and minimal > > mouse movement. > > However in Gnome 3, you need first 1) move your mouse to the upper left > > corner of the screen, 2) and click on the programs menu, 3) wait couple of > > seconds (especially when you click it for the first time), 4) move your > > mouse to the opposite end of the screen to click through the application > > categories, 5) and again move your mouse pointer to where the application > > is, 6) and finally click on the icon to launch it. > > In summary, now it requires 3 + number of categories clicks and much more > > mouse traversal to lauch an application, which I feel a setback in terms of > > user experience compared to Gnome 1&2. > > I believe the situation would be much better if we could make the categories > > traversable by mouse hover instead of clicks, and move the category menu to > > the left side to make it close to the hot spot on the upper left corner of > > the screen. And it'd reduce the unnecessary delay if it displays selected > > few favorite, or most often used applications instead of showing all of them > > when you click on the program menu. I guess even providing an alternative > > hot spot, say lower left corner of the screen to access the program menu > > directly would make it on par with Gnome 2 in terms of mouse clicks needed > > for an application launch. > > I suppose the direction Gnome 3 is moving toward is providing a simple, > > unified desktop environment for variety of devices, including tablets and > > even smart phones. However, I believe simplicity in software doesn't always > > lies in 'eliminating' features, but usually in intuitive design and 'hiding' > > advanced features. > > Suppose, there's some basic tasks which most of the users performs often - > > like launching an application from program menu - consists roughly 30% of > > all desktop features. And there's features which more advanced users need or > > which are not used frequently, like customizing desktop fonts, would > > consists another 30% of the features. And finally there's remaining 40% of > > the features which would rarely be accessed or by expert users or > > developers. > > Then you need to make those basic 30% of features readily accessible - no > > keyboard short cuts, no redundant mouse clicks) in a most intuitive and > > simple way. And you can still expose the advanced 30% of features accessible > > from GUI, but hidden from casual users, preferably by providing 'advanced' > > button like many applications do. > > For the remaining expert features, I guess executing terminal commands or > > changing gconf values to access them shouldn't be much problem. > > So, I'd like to suggest we should collect and priotize all the planned or > > implemented features in Gnome 3 according to a criteria similar to the above > > mentioned, then re-evaluate their accessibility and usability according to > > their nature. So if there's some basic tasks l
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
In that case, we can just remove the application menu altogether and let them alt-f2 type commands to launch applications. Providing categorised applications menu is for the case when user doesn't know the launch command or name of the application he/she wants to open. And many users prefer mouse clicks to key typing. 2011-09-04 (일), 01:58 -0400, Jeremy Bicha: > On 4 September 2011 01:43, Xavier Cho wrote: > > Most of all, I think Gnome 3 requires too much user interaction when > > navigating in the program menu. In the days of global application menu, when > > you need to launch an application all you need to do was 1) click on the > > panel menu icon, 2) and navigate by hovering your mouse over the categories, > > 3) then click on the application. All it needed was 2 clicks and minimal > > mouse movement. > > However in Gnome 3, you need first 1) move your mouse to the upper left > > corner of the screen, 2) and click on the programs menu, 3) wait couple of > > seconds (especially when you click it for the first time), 4) move your > > mouse to the opposite end of the screen to click through the application > > categories, 5) and again move your mouse pointer to where the application > > is, 6) and finally click on the icon to launch it. > > In summary, now it requires 3 + number of categories clicks and much more > > mouse traversal to lauch an application, which I feel a setback in terms of > > user experience compared to Gnome 1&2. > > Devil's advocate. It is possible to launch apps without any mouse > clicks. Press the Windows key (or whatever you like to call the thing) > to open Activities. Type a few letters, (optionally use the arrow > keys), and press Enter to launch the app. > > Jeremy Bicha > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
You can pin apps to the dash by dragging them there, or right-click on its icon in the dash. On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Xavier Cho wrote: > I've been using Gnome 3 for some months, and overall I think it's definitely > a step in the right direction. However, as a long time Gnome 1&2 user, I > find it lacking in some aspects in terms of usability and features. > Most of all, I think Gnome 3 requires too much user interaction when > navigating in the program menu. In the days of global application menu, when > you need to launch an application all you need to do was 1) click on the > panel menu icon, 2) and navigate by hovering your mouse over the categories, > 3) then click on the application. All it needed was 2 clicks and minimal > mouse movement. > However in Gnome 3, you need first 1) move your mouse to the upper left > corner of the screen, 2) and click on the programs menu, 3) wait couple of > seconds (especially when you click it for the first time), 4) move your > mouse to the opposite end of the screen to click through the application > categories, 5) and again move your mouse pointer to where the application > is, 6) and finally click on the icon to launch it. > In summary, now it requires 3 + number of categories clicks and much more > mouse traversal to lauch an application, which I feel a setback in terms of > user experience compared to Gnome 1&2. > I believe the situation would be much better if we could make the categories > traversable by mouse hover instead of clicks, and move the category menu to > the left side to make it close to the hot spot on the upper left corner of > the screen. And it'd reduce the unnecessary delay if it displays selected > few favorite, or most often used applications instead of showing all of them > when you click on the program menu. I guess even providing an alternative > hot spot, say lower left corner of the screen to access the program menu > directly would make it on par with Gnome 2 in terms of mouse clicks needed > for an application launch. > I suppose the direction Gnome 3 is moving toward is providing a simple, > unified desktop environment for variety of devices, including tablets and > even smart phones. However, I believe simplicity in software doesn't always > lies in 'eliminating' features, but usually in intuitive design and 'hiding' > advanced features. > Suppose, there's some basic tasks which most of the users performs often - > like launching an application from program menu - consists roughly 30% of > all desktop features. And there's features which more advanced users need or > which are not used frequently, like customizing desktop fonts, would > consists another 30% of the features. And finally there's remaining 40% of > the features which would rarely be accessed or by expert users or > developers. > Then you need to make those basic 30% of features readily accessible - no > keyboard short cuts, no redundant mouse clicks) in a most intuitive and > simple way. And you can still expose the advanced 30% of features accessible > from GUI, but hidden from casual users, preferably by providing 'advanced' > button like many applications do. > For the remaining expert features, I guess executing terminal commands or > changing gconf values to access them shouldn't be much problem. > So, I'd like to suggest we should collect and priotize all the planned or > implemented features in Gnome 3 according to a criteria similar to the above > mentioned, then re-evaluate their accessibility and usability according to > their nature. So if there's some basic tasks like accessing an application > menu requiring too much mouse interaction, or some non expert features like > chaging desktop fonts missing from the control panel, we could easily detect > such problem and fix it in a consistent way if there's such a design > principle understood and agreed upon among the most developers and users. > I guess Gnome desktop has come a long way, and now it's not uncommon to see > non tech-savy people use it as their primary work environment. So, it's all > about user experience and usability which really matters and would put Gnome > ahead of other competitors. > > Xavier Cho > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > -- Jasper ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
On 4 September 2011 01:43, Xavier Cho wrote: > Most of all, I think Gnome 3 requires too much user interaction when > navigating in the program menu. In the days of global application menu, when > you need to launch an application all you need to do was 1) click on the > panel menu icon, 2) and navigate by hovering your mouse over the categories, > 3) then click on the application. All it needed was 2 clicks and minimal > mouse movement. > However in Gnome 3, you need first 1) move your mouse to the upper left > corner of the screen, 2) and click on the programs menu, 3) wait couple of > seconds (especially when you click it for the first time), 4) move your > mouse to the opposite end of the screen to click through the application > categories, 5) and again move your mouse pointer to where the application > is, 6) and finally click on the icon to launch it. > In summary, now it requires 3 + number of categories clicks and much more > mouse traversal to lauch an application, which I feel a setback in terms of > user experience compared to Gnome 1&2. Devil's advocate. It is possible to launch apps without any mouse clicks. Press the Windows key (or whatever you like to call the thing) to open Activities. Type a few letters, (optionally use the arrow keys), and press Enter to launch the app. Jeremy Bicha ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Launching an application requires too many mouse clicks in Gnome 3
I've been using Gnome 3 for some months, and overall I think it's definitely a step in the right direction. However, as a long time Gnome 1&2 user, I find it lacking in some aspects in terms of usability and features. Most of all, I think Gnome 3 requires too much user interaction when navigating in the program menu. In the days of global application menu, when you need to launch an application all you need to do was 1) click on the panel menu icon, 2) and navigate by hovering your mouse over the categories, 3) then click on the application. All it needed was 2 clicks and minimal mouse movement. However in Gnome 3, you need first 1) move your mouse to the upper left corner of the screen, 2) and click on the programs menu, 3) wait couple of seconds (especially when you click it for the first time), 4) move your mouse to the opposite end of the screen to click through the application categories, 5) and again move your mouse pointer to where the application is, 6) and finally click on the icon to launch it. In summary, now it requires 3 + number of categories clicks and much more mouse traversal to lauch an application, which I feel a setback in terms of user experience compared to Gnome 1&2. I believe the situation would be much better if we could make the categories traversable by mouse hover instead of clicks, and move the category menu to the left side to make it close to the hot spot on the upper left corner of the screen. And it'd reduce the unnecessary delay if it displays selected few favorite, or most often used applications instead of showing all of them when you click on the program menu. I guess even providing an alternative hot spot, say lower left corner of the screen to access the program menu directly would make it on par with Gnome 2 in terms of mouse clicks needed for an application launch. I suppose the direction Gnome 3 is moving toward is providing a simple, unified desktop environment for variety of devices, including tablets and even smart phones. However, I believe simplicity in software doesn't always lies in 'eliminating' features, but usually in intuitive design and 'hiding' advanced features. Suppose, there's some basic tasks which most of the users performs often - like launching an application from program menu - consists roughly 30% of all desktop features. And there's features which more advanced users need or which are not used frequently, like customizing desktop fonts, would consists another 30% of the features. And finally there's remaining 40% of the features which would rarely be accessed or by expert users or developers. Then you need to make those basic 30% of features readily accessible - no keyboard short cuts, no redundant mouse clicks) in a most intuitive and simple way. And you can still expose the advanced 30% of features accessible from GUI, but hidden from casual users, preferably by providing 'advanced' button like many applications do. For the remaining expert features, I guess executing terminal commands or changing gconf values to access them shouldn't be much problem. So, I'd like to suggest we should collect and priotize all the planned or implemented features in Gnome 3 according to a criteria similar to the above mentioned, then re-evaluate their accessibility and usability according to their nature. So if there's some basic tasks like accessing an application menu requiring too much mouse interaction, or some non expert features like chaging desktop fonts missing from the control panel, we could easily detect such problem and fix it in a consistent way if there's such a design principle understood and agreed upon among the most developers and users. I guess Gnome desktop has come a long way, and now it's not uncommon to see non tech-savy people use it as their primary work environment. So, it's all about user experience and usability which really matters and would put Gnome ahead of other competitors. Xavier Cho ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Archiving old non-maintained (for GNOME 3) applets
Le vendredi 10 juin 2011, à 12:07 +0200, Vincent Untz a écrit : > So far, I only have this small list: > > bookmark-applet > contact-lookup-applet > deskbar-applet > gnome-netstatus > > It also appears that libpanelappletmm won't get ported (and the gnote > developers decided to directly use the C library instead for the GNOME 3 > port). > > So unless anybody complains about those 5 modules, I'll file a bug to > get them archived. No objection => I filed https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=654234 Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Archiving old non-maintained (for GNOME 3) applets
Il 10/06/2011 12:07, Vincent Untz ha scritto: Hi, I guess everyone knows that GNOME 2 applets don't work in GNOME 3, and talking here and there, the feedback I got is that it wasn't worth creating a bridge to be able to load those in the GNOME 3 panel. As several applets are not going to be ported to GNOME 3 (either because the code is unmaintained or it has been announced already), I think we should clearly archive them so that translators stop working on them and distributors know their status. So far, I only have this small list: bookmark-applet contact-lookup-applet deskbar-applet gnome-netstatus It also appears that libpanelappletmm won't get ported (and the gnote developers decided to directly use the C library instead for the GNOME 3 port). So unless anybody complains about those 5 modules, I'll file a bug to get them archived. Is there any other git module for an applet that we should archive? quick-lounge-applet (I'm the maintainer) can be archived as well, it was an applet to organize launchers on the panel, it's clearly of no use now that we have the GNOME Shell. - Paolo ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Archiving old non-maintained (for GNOME 3) applets
Hi, I guess everyone knows that GNOME 2 applets don't work in GNOME 3, and talking here and there, the feedback I got is that it wasn't worth creating a bridge to be able to load those in the GNOME 3 panel. As several applets are not going to be ported to GNOME 3 (either because the code is unmaintained or it has been announced already), I think we should clearly archive them so that translators stop working on them and distributors know their status. So far, I only have this small list: bookmark-applet contact-lookup-applet deskbar-applet gnome-netstatus It also appears that libpanelappletmm won't get ported (and the gnote developers decided to directly use the C library instead for the GNOME 3 port). So unless anybody complains about those 5 modules, I'll file a bug to get them archived. Is there any other git module for an applet that we should archive? Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
[Fwd: Praise for Gnome 3]
Hi guys, I thought that some people here might appreciate some positive feedback on the GNOME 3 release which came in to gnome-press-contact. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org --- Begin Message --- Dear Gnome Developers, I apologize, but I wasn't sure exactly how to contact the gnome team, so please forward this to any and all pertaining participants, if you can. I have been a Linux/Gnome user for a long time, as well as an active member in the open-source community. Credit where credit is due, and I have to say that the Gnome 3 release is nothing short of sheer brilliance. It's a much-needed revolutionary step for Linux and the OSS world, one that I think will draw countless users from around the globe. Just wanted to express my sincerest thanks to your team for all your hard work and timeless hours spent to provide such a magnificent product. Best regards, -- Jesse DuBord www.shadowformed.com <http://www.shadowformed.com> "Always do right. This will gratify some people and astonish the rest." - Mark Twain -- http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-private >From time to time confidential and sensitive information will be discussed on this mailing list. Please take care to mark confidential information as confidential, and do not redistribute this information without permission.--- End Message --- ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Help, What modulset is correct for Gnome 3?
>> What is the correct moduleset to use to build Gnome 3.0? > > gnome-suites-core. > > gnome-suites-core-deps are the dependencies of gnome-suites-core. > > I indicated only the problem moduleset(s). I have the corresponding gnome-core modulesets as well. I am asking about the versions, and the errors I get on the patches (see earlier message jhbuild cairo checkout error). If there is a better place to ask about the released code please let me know. I haven't had much success on gnome-love. Thanks, -Brian PS. I apologize for cross posting. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Help, What modulset is correct for Gnome 3?
Please avoid cross-posting. This does not look like content for desktop-devel@ - please remove that address for potential responses. On Sat, 2011-05-14 at 10:13 -0700, bsquared wrote: > What is the correct moduleset to use to build Gnome 3.0? gnome-suites-core. gnome-suites-core-deps are the dependencies of gnome-suites-core. andre -- mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper | http://www.openismus.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Help, What modulset is correct for Gnome 3?
Hello, What is the correct moduleset to use to build Gnome 3.0? I have tried both of these: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/teams/releng/3.0.0/gnome-suites-core-deps-3.0.0.modules http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/teams/releng/3.0.0/gnome-suites-core-deps-3.0.1.modules But the following lines had to be commented due to file not found errors. Any help is appreciated. -- Thank you, -Brian ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On 04/18/2011 09:52 AM, Justin Joseph wrote: Thank you!!! And show me how do I access so called 'hibernate' in gnome shell. I didn't ask for a name. I asked for a feature. One more issue. I have just one user account in my system. Still I get 'logout' and 'switch user' in the menus. and obviously no restart or shutdown. You get "Power Off" instead of "Log Out" from pressing Alt when the menu is shown. This is counter-intuitive IMO. Additionally, if you have one user on the system anyway, why would you ever need "Log Out" or "Switch User", they seem quite redundant to me? I agree with Alan on the Suspend vs. Hibernate issue too. I remember a GUADEC or two back, I shut my laptop lid, thinking it was hibernated and it didn't. Instead, it almost overheated and I lost all my battery power by the time I noticed. Suspend is quite useless for me generally and with today's SSD speeds, booting up is just as fast as hibernating on my Lenovo X201. The other reason I don't use it is related to network manager/sim card issues when trying to use a 3g network when travelling - but that may have been fixed by now. -- Regards, Martyn ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
El dom, 17-04-2011 a las 23:39 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi escribió: > hi; > > On 17 April 2011 23:31, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > El dom, 17-04-2011 a las 22:47 +0200, Andre Klapper escribió: > >> On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 12:50 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > >> > Regarding gnome-tweak-tool, is it able to enable settings system-wide? > >> > Or, is that feature even planned for the future? > >> > >> https://live.gnome.org/GnomeTweakTool > >> > >> andre > > > > Maybe I am missing something in that webpage but I cannot see anything > > related with the ability to set global default settings (using polkit > > for example) > > gnome-tweak-tool is a user tool, not a system administrator tool. > > for sysadmins you probably want to look at GSettings and DConf, e.g.: > > http://live.gnome.org/dconf/SystemAdminstrators > > ciao, > Emmanuele. > OK, thanks for the clarification :-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Alan Cox wrote: > > > The correct use case for any electronic device is power on when using > it, > > > power off when not. > > I couldn't agree any more. The default behaviour should be > > shut-down/restart. > > In the suspend case there are very good reasons for not wanting the user > to think they have powered off and get a nasty surprise like overheating > but in the hibernate case the device *is* off. The system state is > committed to disk and the power is killed. > > Using suspend when a laptop is being moved also violates many companies > security policies because it's rather too easy to extract data from such > a system. If it's stolen when using hibernate + encryption it is pretty > safe. > > So you don't want to muddle suspend and hibernate + poweroff. > > > This will be awesome if can have this behaviour. When starting the > computer > > user can select between 'resume' and 'new session'. Can we not write the > > session data to the disk and access it on next boot? > > It's called "hibernate". Most electronica comes back on in roughly the > state you turned it off. > Thank you!!! And show me how do I access so called 'hibernate' in gnome shell. I didn't ask for a name. I asked for a feature. One more issue. I have just one user account in my system. Still I get 'logout' and 'switch user' in the menus. and obviously no restart or shutdown. Justin ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
Jan de Groot a écrit: > On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 08:45 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: >> This is why I think GNOME should start a marketing campaign of >> "Awesome Hardware" which is known to work flawlessly, and "Sadface >> Hardware" which is known to work, but with glitches. This can help >> users make informed choices while buying machines (or building them), >> and would help us improve hardware support for Linux as well. In most >> cases, it's just the last 1% that's left. > > With linux it's impossible to support such a list. Things that work > perfect on the kernel you test with will be broken two versions after > that. The issue is not just limited to kernels, but also to manufacturer > BIOS versions, xorg-server, the video driver and mesa. If you add binary > drivers like nvidia or fglrx to that list, things become even more > complicated. If some people are willing to maintain such a list, I believe they should not be discouraged, to say the least. There are similar pages somewhere on the interweb targeted at laptops and they did help me quite a bit in my buying choices. Having your hardware not well supported just because of a bug in a certain version of the kernel is not the same thing as having it not supported because the manufacturer doesn't provide Free Software drivers. In the former case you can get away with e.g, selecting a given version of the kernel and in the latter case you are just asking for troubles if you buy such a hardware. I understand the complexity of adding non-free divers to the testing matrix, but is that really a problem? Why not just considering Free Software drivers? Would that be _that_ surprising, coming from us? -- Dodji ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 08:45 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > This is why I think GNOME should start a marketing campaign of > "Awesome Hardware" which is known to work flawlessly, and "Sadface > Hardware" which is known to work, but with glitches. This can help > users make informed choices while buying machines (or building them), > and would help us improve hardware support for Linux as well. In most > cases, it's just the last 1% that's left. With linux it's impossible to support such a list. Things that work perfect on the kernel you test with will be broken two versions after that. The issue is not just limited to kernels, but also to manufacturer BIOS versions, xorg-server, the video driver and mesa. If you add binary drivers like nvidia or fglrx to that list, things become even more complicated. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
hi; On 17 April 2011 23:31, Pacho Ramos wrote: > El dom, 17-04-2011 a las 22:47 +0200, Andre Klapper escribió: >> On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 12:50 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: >> > Regarding gnome-tweak-tool, is it able to enable settings system-wide? >> > Or, is that feature even planned for the future? >> >> https://live.gnome.org/GnomeTweakTool >> >> andre > > Maybe I am missing something in that webpage but I cannot see anything > related with the ability to set global default settings (using polkit > for example) gnome-tweak-tool is a user tool, not a system administrator tool. for sysadmins you probably want to look at GSettings and DConf, e.g.: http://live.gnome.org/dconf/SystemAdminstrators ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
El dom, 17-04-2011 a las 22:47 +0200, Andre Klapper escribió: > On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 12:50 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Regarding gnome-tweak-tool, is it able to enable settings system-wide? > > Or, is that feature even planned for the future? > > https://live.gnome.org/GnomeTweakTool > > andre Maybe I am missing something in that webpage but I cannot see anything related with the ability to set global default settings (using polkit for example) Thanks for your help signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
> > The correct use case for any electronic device is power on when using it, > > power off when not. > I couldn't agree any more. The default behaviour should be > shut-down/restart. In the suspend case there are very good reasons for not wanting the user to think they have powered off and get a nasty surprise like overheating but in the hibernate case the device *is* off. The system state is committed to disk and the power is killed. Using suspend when a laptop is being moved also violates many companies security policies because it's rather too easy to extract data from such a system. If it's stolen when using hibernate + encryption it is pretty safe. So you don't want to muddle suspend and hibernate + poweroff. > This will be awesome if can have this behaviour. When starting the computer > user can select between 'resume' and 'new session'. Can we not write the > session data to the disk and access it on next boot? It's called "hibernate". Most electronica comes back on in roughly the state you turned it off. You want a real "power off" as well to recover from nasty situations but that is "discard the hibernate session" The other big nasty to beware of though is removable media. A hibernated system has not necessarily left removable media in a state they are unmounted. That is going to be an expectation the desktop needs to properly manage. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 12:50 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Regarding gnome-tweak-tool, is it able to enable settings system-wide? > Or, is that feature even planned for the future? https://live.gnome.org/GnomeTweakTool andre -- mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper | http://www.openismus.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote: > Sam Thursfield a écrit: > >> Suspend and hibernate are both hacks around the fact that power on and >> power off take a long time and that our session manager doesn't save >> session state. > > This seems to be an over-simplification to me. Processes managed by the > session manager are just a part of what comprises the user's working > set. And of course, there are users who use things that are independent > of a particular session manager. In other words, the scope of the > feature which purpose is to save the global working set of a user is by > essence broader than just the one of "our session manager". A very good point. What I should have said here is that neither the session manager nor (most) apps manage to preserve state across sessions. Firefox is a great example here and I actually depend quite a lot on its behaviour these days (keeping tabs open as todo items etc). Bringing this to other apps would be a win for everyone anyway, regardless of also improving the power on/off situation. Sam ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
Sam Thursfield a écrit: > Suspend and hibernate are both hacks around the fact that power on and > power off take a long time and that our session manager doesn't save > session state. This seems to be an over-simplification to me. Processes managed by the session manager are just a part of what comprises the user's working set. And of course, there are users who use things that are independent of a particular session manager. In other words, the scope of the feature which purpose is to save the global working set of a user is by essence broader than just the one of "our session manager". -- Dodji ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 11:19, Sam Thursfield wrote: > I've been watching this discussion with increasing disappointment. > Suspend and hibernate are both hacks around the fact that power on and > power off take a long time and that our session manager doesn't save > session state. > > Lots of progress is being made on system boot up time, it's improved > massively in the last few years in various distros and more cool stuff > is still to come. There are movements towards replacing the ancient PC > BIOS as well. And the next version of OSX contains "Resume" - which > saves the session between restarts. > > Let's do our batteries a favour and concentrate on the real problems, > rather than creating an increasingly complex set of workarounds. The > correct use case for any electronic device is power on when using it, > power off when not. It's more than that (unless I'm lost in the discussion)... One example: when you have a desktop setup, with a whole bunch of terminals open, some with chroot running, it's far faster to just Suspend/Hibernate than to reboot and then having to setup all of that again. That's one of the reasons why Suspend/Hibernate is such a great invention. Even if the system booted in half a second, it takes longer to get to previous working state. Luckily the browsers save previous state (automatic), and so does gnome-session (via a setting that some people wouldn't know of), so that's two less thing to worry. There's ways to do this with gnome-terminal, but it's hard to set it up (one must know shells a little more intimately than is willing). I don't know about other terminals. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
El dom, 17-04-2011 a las 00:13 +0200, Johannes Schmid escribió: > Can you move that discussion to > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=643457 > please? Other than that, use gnome-tweak-tool to have a "Power Off..." > option and control suspend behaviour. > > Thanks, > Johannes > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list Regarding gnome-tweak-tool, is it able to enable settings system-wide? Or, is that feature even planned for the future? Thanks a lot for the information :-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
> Suspend and hibernate are both hacks around the fact that power on and > power off take a long time and that our session manager doesn't save > session state. > > The correct use case for any electronic device is power on when using it, > power off when not. > I couldn't agree any more. The default behaviour should be shut-down/restart. Lots of progress is being made on system boot up time, it's improved > massively in the last few years in various distros and more cool stuff > is still to come. There are movements towards replacing the ancient PC > BIOS as well. And the next version of OSX contains "Resume" - which > saves the session between restarts. > This will be awesome if can have this behaviour. When starting the computer user can select between 'resume' and 'new session'. Can we not write the session data to the disk and access it on next boot? Justin ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 4:15 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote: >> Le jeudi 14 avril 2011 à 05:17 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit : >>> Other people want it because suspend doesn't work on their hardware. >>> Adding a configuration option is just putting wallpaper over the >>> cracked wall; the real solution is to fix suspend. >> >> I’m sorry but I don’t buy this. Suspend is among the things that have >> always been broken, mostly because of broken BIOSes. As long as we don’t >> have control over the hardware, we can’t be sure it works. >> > > You're absolutely right. This is precisely the reason why Apple is > able to ship quality OSes that boot fast, work as expected, and give > excellent performance (iOS and OS X). OTOH, my own machine has a > partially-working suspend because the media keys stop working on > resume[1]. > > This is why I think GNOME should start a marketing campaign of > "Awesome Hardware" which is known to work flawlessly, and "Sadface > Hardware" which is known to work, but with glitches. This can help > users make informed choices while buying machines (or building them), > and would help us improve hardware support for Linux as well. In most > cases, it's just the last 1% that's left. > > This is quite similar to the wireless hardware whitelists/blacklists > that we've been using for a while. > >>> And in the meantime, the wallpaper should be to detect suspend works >>> as intended, and do something else if you can't. >> >> How can it detect that? There are just way too many ways it can fail. >> Some machines will suspend but never resume. Some will resume but in a >> wrong state. At that moment it’s too late to detect that suspend doesn’t >> work. (And if you are talking about a whitelist/blacklist, then think of >> its maintenance too.) >> >> Even worse than the “suspend on lid close” behavior, is the idea to >> suspend instead of shutting down. Computers are not all laptops, some of >> them require to be unplugged sometimes. Laptops are not all used >> everyday; they do not last more than 2 days in suspend mode. > > I honestly think that the solution to this problem is suspend-hybrid > support[2]. Write hibernate image to swap, then turn off disk and > suspend to ram. That way if you pull the plug or the laptop battery > dies, the machine just resumes on boot, and you don't lost any of your > work. This is precisely what Apple already does. > >> Add to that >> the need to reboot to install kernel updates. >> > > I think this would be handled via PackageKit integration — you get > prompted to reboot/relogin when an update is installed that needs such > a thing. > >> You need to take into account that the vast majority of our users use >> PC-class hardware. And you might not like it, but with such hardware >> they need to learn the difference between reboot, shutdown and suspend. >> It’s true that it should not be the case, but if you want to fix that >> you should develop hardware, not software. > > As I said above, if we get suspend-hybrid support added to the kernel, > computers that run directly off AC mains are covered as well. I've been watching this discussion with increasing disappointment. Suspend and hibernate are both hacks around the fact that power on and power off take a long time and that our session manager doesn't save session state. Lots of progress is being made on system boot up time, it's improved massively in the last few years in various distros and more cool stuff is still to come. There are movements towards replacing the ancient PC BIOS as well. And the next version of OSX contains "Resume" - which saves the session between restarts. Let's do our batteries a favour and concentrate on the real problems, rather than creating an increasingly complex set of workarounds. The correct use case for any electronic device is power on when using it, power off when not. Sam ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
Le dimanche 17 avril 2011 à 00:13 +0200, Johannes Schmid a écrit : > Other than that, use gnome-tweak-tool to have a "Power Off..." > option and control suspend behaviour. The problem is not for me, I know how to change a GSettings setting. I’m worried about our users. I’m really not thrilled at all with the gnome-tweak-tool idea. Either the setting can be changed for regular use, and it should be in the control center, either it should not. The cr*ptool is only useful for a minority of users who will have the idea to launch it. Cheers, -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone, `-[…] I will see what I can do for you.” -- Jörg Schilling signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 3:41 AM, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le jeudi 14 avril 2011 à 05:17 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit : >> Other people want it because suspend doesn't work on their hardware. >> Adding a configuration option is just putting wallpaper over the >> cracked wall; the real solution is to fix suspend. > > I’m sorry but I don’t buy this. Suspend is among the things that have > always been broken, mostly because of broken BIOSes. As long as we don’t > have control over the hardware, we can’t be sure it works. > You're absolutely right. This is precisely the reason why Apple is able to ship quality OSes that boot fast, work as expected, and give excellent performance (iOS and OS X). OTOH, my own machine has a partially-working suspend because the media keys stop working on resume[1]. This is why I think GNOME should start a marketing campaign of "Awesome Hardware" which is known to work flawlessly, and "Sadface Hardware" which is known to work, but with glitches. This can help users make informed choices while buying machines (or building them), and would help us improve hardware support for Linux as well. In most cases, it's just the last 1% that's left. This is quite similar to the wireless hardware whitelists/blacklists that we've been using for a while. >> And in the meantime, the wallpaper should be to detect suspend works >> as intended, and do something else if you can't. > > How can it detect that? There are just way too many ways it can fail. > Some machines will suspend but never resume. Some will resume but in a > wrong state. At that moment it’s too late to detect that suspend doesn’t > work. (And if you are talking about a whitelist/blacklist, then think of > its maintenance too.) > > Even worse than the “suspend on lid close” behavior, is the idea to > suspend instead of shutting down. Computers are not all laptops, some of > them require to be unplugged sometimes. Laptops are not all used > everyday; they do not last more than 2 days in suspend mode. I honestly think that the solution to this problem is suspend-hybrid support[2]. Write hibernate image to swap, then turn off disk and suspend to ram. That way if you pull the plug or the laptop battery dies, the machine just resumes on boot, and you don't lost any of your work. This is precisely what Apple already does. > Add to that > the need to reboot to install kernel updates. > I think this would be handled via PackageKit integration — you get prompted to reboot/relogin when an update is installed that needs such a thing. > You need to take into account that the vast majority of our users use > PC-class hardware. And you might not like it, but with such hardware > they need to learn the difference between reboot, shutdown and suspend. > It’s true that it should not be the case, but if you want to fix that > you should develop hardware, not software. As I said above, if we get suspend-hybrid support added to the kernel, computers that run directly off AC mains are covered as well. Cheers, 1. https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/657338 2. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=560085 -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
Hi! Am Sonntag, den 17.04.2011, 00:11 +0200 schrieb Josselin Mouette: > Le jeudi 14 avril 2011 à 05:17 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit : > > Other people want it because suspend doesn't work on their hardware. > > Adding a configuration option is just putting wallpaper over the > > cracked wall; the real solution is to fix suspend. > > I’m sorry but I don’t buy this. Suspend is among the things that have > always been broken, mostly because of broken BIOSes. As long as we don’t > have control over the hardware, we can’t be sure it works. Can you move that discussion to https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=643457 please? Other than that, use gnome-tweak-tool to have a "Power Off..." option and control suspend behaviour. Thanks, Johannes ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
Le jeudi 14 avril 2011 à 05:17 -0400, Jasper St. Pierre a écrit : > Other people want it because suspend doesn't work on their hardware. > Adding a configuration option is just putting wallpaper over the > cracked wall; the real solution is to fix suspend. I’m sorry but I don’t buy this. Suspend is among the things that have always been broken, mostly because of broken BIOSes. As long as we don’t have control over the hardware, we can’t be sure it works. > And in the meantime, the wallpaper should be to detect suspend works > as intended, and do something else if you can't. How can it detect that? There are just way too many ways it can fail. Some machines will suspend but never resume. Some will resume but in a wrong state. At that moment it’s too late to detect that suspend doesn’t work. (And if you are talking about a whitelist/blacklist, then think of its maintenance too.) Even worse than the “suspend on lid close” behavior, is the idea to suspend instead of shutting down. Computers are not all laptops, some of them require to be unplugged sometimes. Laptops are not all used everyday; they do not last more than 2 days in suspend mode. Add to that the need to reboot to install kernel updates. You need to take into account that the vast majority of our users use PC-class hardware. And you might not like it, but with such hardware they need to learn the difference between reboot, shutdown and suspend. It’s true that it should not be the case, but if you want to fix that you should develop hardware, not software. Cheers, -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone, `-[…] I will see what I can do for you.” -- Jörg Schilling ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [Usability] gnome 3
On 04/14/2011 01:04 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: > There's a whiteboard for that: > https://live.gnome.org/Design/Whiteboards/SwitchGuidance > > Feel free to discuss it there. Mmm... surprisingly, I fully agree with what's written in there. :-) Is the page still under definition, or can we consider it already authoritative and therefore file bugs on applications abusing GtkSwitch? Ciao, Alberto -- http://blog.mardy.it <- geek in un lingua international! ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [Usability] gnome 3
tor 2011-04-14 klockan 11:04 +0100 skrev Bastien Nocera: > On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 11:53 +0300, Alberto Mardegan wrote: > > > > - Theme. > > Both of those you can tweak using gnome-tweak-tool and gnome-shell > extensions. > > You'd better try it before making further comments though, I'm sure > you'll enjoy it :) This was one thing that surprised me with gnome 3, that all the fun customizations was gone by default unless you install the tweak-tool. For me it is ok, since I mostly run standard themes, but people like to be able to change themes, run a silly screensaver, change the fonts of the window borders and so on. And even if I do not change these settings, removing them from the default gives me a feeling of "the gnome people" is the dictators and the users have to adapt. I'm sure there where good reasons for not including the Appearance capplet, like the theaming in the shell not being ready for primetime or something, but I think it may have sent the wrong signals. I hope we still want Gnome to be a fun and happy desktop environment, that lets the user mess around. I'm a big fan of the work done with gnome 3... I haven't been this excited about gnome for years, I really love the design. So this issue is not a big problem for me but I think it might be good to think no only about the practical implications of removing something, but also about the signals it will send. //Mattias ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: [Usability] gnome 3
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 11:53 +0300, Alberto Mardegan wrote: > I think this discussion is more pertinent in the usability ML; I'm adding > that > in CC and to the Reply-to. > > On 04/14/2011 11:24 AM, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: > > Today, I'm writing to you for the first time and it's about this new > > version > > of gnome 3. I was surprised: lots of changes, but I had little problem > > about > > all this new way of getting things done. Great work! However, the total > > lack > > of customization is totally unacceptable to me. So sorry guys, but > > after all > > these years, you lost me. I just wanted you to know it, since you can't > > guess. Thank you for everything. > > > > > > Well, we can't add flags and switches for every little piece of the user > > experience, so what are some of the major things that ought to be > > customizable? > > I can tell a few things that are important to me to be customizable, with a > big > disclaimer though: I didn't try gnome 3 yet, my assumptions are based on the > things I've read about it. > > - Suspend on laptop lid closed; many people have asked for this to be > configurable. > > - Theme. Both of those you can tweak using gnome-tweak-tool and gnome-shell extensions. You'd better try it before making further comments though, I'm sure you'll enjoy it :) > Then, not related to configurability, something I like to complain about: > > - Usage of GtkSwitch should depend on whether the device has a touchscreen; > if > it hasn't, it should never be shown; and even when there there is a > touchscreen, > it should be used only when it makes sense: that is, it's turning on/off a > device (such as a webcam), never for configuration options. There's a whiteboard for that: https://live.gnome.org/Design/Whiteboards/SwitchGuidance Feel free to discuss it there. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Alberto Mardegan < ma...@users.sourceforge.net> wrote: > I think this discussion is more pertinent in the usability ML; I'm adding > that in CC and to the Reply-to. > > > On 04/14/2011 11:24 AM, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: > >>Today, I'm writing to you for the first time and it's about this new >> version >>of gnome 3. I was surprised: lots of changes, but I had little problem >> about >>all this new way of getting things done. Great work! However, the total >> lack >>of customization is totally unacceptable to me. So sorry guys, but >> after all >>these years, you lost me. I just wanted you to know it, since you can't >>guess. Thank you for everything. >> >> >> Well, we can't add flags and switches for every little piece of the user >> experience, so what are some of the major things that ought to be >> customizable? >> > > I can tell a few things that are important to me to be customizable, with a > big disclaimer though: I didn't try gnome 3 yet, my assumptions are based on > the things I've read about it. > Please do. The whole design philosophy behind gnome 3 is to GTFO when you need to focus on a task, make it easy so you *can* switch and organize tasks, and make you aware of interruptions via a separate component, the message tray. Hopefully, the message tray concept extends to other useful information in the future: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell-design/plain/mockups/static/notifications-summary.pngshows a mail client with 5 unread messages, an appointment, music in rhythmbox, and two IM chats. > - Suspend on laptop lid closed; many people have asked for this to be > configurable. > There has been some community outrage on this, and hopefully we can Do The Right Thing for everybody. My opinion: Some people want it because suspend takes too long to wake up from, but a configuration option is the wrong thing for this: it would be annoying if you had to go a settings panel to check a box to turn off Suspend so you can walk five minutes to the meeting, and then remember to turn it back on for the long commute home. You should just be able to close the lid, unplug the computer, and walk to the meeting. Other people want it because suspend doesn't work on their hardware. Adding a configuration option is just putting wallpaper over the cracked wall; the real solution is to fix suspend. And in the meantime, the wallpaper should be to detect suspend works as intended, and do something else if you can't. > - Theme. > We already have some support for theming by CSS right now, and you can indeed change it but this has a big "unsupported" sticker slapped on it because there's no guarantee on multiple things related to the CSS files: class names, etc. This should hopefully change in the future, with themes being supported and promoted, but for now we need to focus on getting features out first. > Then, not related to configurability, something I like to complain about: > > - Usage of GtkSwitch should depend on whether the device has a touchscreen; > if it hasn't, it should never be shown; and even when there there is a > touchscreen, it should be used only when it makes sense: that is, it's > turning on/off a device (such as a webcam), never for configuration options. > I really like GtkSwitch myself, even working on a desktop here, but unfortunately it may be a bit misused. There is work on documenting how it should be used, but the GNOME 3 HIG documentation is late. > Just my two cents. > > Ciao, > Alberto > > -- > http://blog.mardy.it <-- geek in un lingua international! > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
I think this discussion is more pertinent in the usability ML; I'm adding that in CC and to the Reply-to. On 04/14/2011 11:24 AM, Jasper St. Pierre wrote: Today, I'm writing to you for the first time and it's about this new version of gnome 3. I was surprised: lots of changes, but I had little problem about all this new way of getting things done. Great work! However, the total lack of customization is totally unacceptable to me. So sorry guys, but after all these years, you lost me. I just wanted you to know it, since you can't guess. Thank you for everything. Well, we can't add flags and switches for every little piece of the user experience, so what are some of the major things that ought to be customizable? I can tell a few things that are important to me to be customizable, with a big disclaimer though: I didn't try gnome 3 yet, my assumptions are based on the things I've read about it. - Suspend on laptop lid closed; many people have asked for this to be configurable. - Theme. Then, not related to configurability, something I like to complain about: - Usage of GtkSwitch should depend on whether the device has a touchscreen; if it hasn't, it should never be shown; and even when there there is a touchscreen, it should be used only when it makes sense: that is, it's turning on/off a device (such as a webcam), never for configuration options. Just my two cents. Ciao, Alberto -- http://blog.mardy.it <-- geek in un lingua international! ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 10:19 AM, Antoine Pézier wrote: > Hello, > I've been a linux user for personal use since 99, and then for my > professional work. I used gnome since it's begginning and always prefered > gnome's user experience over KDE: simplest, it just did what I needed it to > do, the way I wanted. > Is there anything in gnome3 that you feel prevents you from experiencing the joy of "it just did what I needed to do, the way I wanted"? Something extremely broken is not the same as being customizable -- if there are any disappointments in the user experience, we'd love to know them so that we can identify flaws in our designs. Today, I'm writing to you for the first time and it's about this new version > of gnome 3. I was surprised: lots of changes, but I had little problem about > all this new way of getting things done. Great work! However, the total lack > of customization is totally unacceptable to me. So sorry guys, but after all > these years, you lost me. I just wanted you to know it, since you can't > guess. Thank you for everything. > Well, we can't add flags and switches for every little piece of the user experience, so what are some of the major things that ought to be customizable? > Cordially, > Antoine Pézier > > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome 3
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 04:19:09PM +0200, Antoine Pézier wrote: > Today, I'm writing to you for the first time and it's about this new version > of gnome 3. I was surprised: lots of changes, but I had little problem about > all this new way of getting things done. Great work! However, the total lack > of customization is totally unacceptable to me. So sorry guys, but after all > these years, you lost me. I just wanted you to know it, since you can't > guess. Thank you for everything. Try it for a week. After that, install gnome-tweak-tool. But really recommend not changing anything in the beginning. Also, when changing something, try to determine if GNOME couldn't have had done something different (better) by default. The goal is that things automatically work right. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
gnome 3
Hello, I've been a linux user for personal use since 99, and then for my professional work. I used gnome since it's begginning and always prefered gnome's user experience over KDE: simplest, it just did what I needed it to do, the way I wanted. Today, I'm writing to you for the first time and it's about this new version of gnome 3. I was surprised: lots of changes, but I had little problem about all this new way of getting things done. Great work! However, the total lack of customization is totally unacceptable to me. So sorry guys, but after all these years, you lost me. I just wanted you to know it, since you can't guess. Thank you for everything. Cordially, Antoine Pézier ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Jump Lists / Quick Lists / Dash Embellishments in GNOME 3
> Having jumplists in the shell overlay was desired by pretty much > everybody, though it was not specified whether they would be > implemented as right-click menus on application icons, or something > else. > > My takeaway from the session was that we would use a combination of > static verbs (specified in .desktop) and dynamic actions (specified > using GApplication actions) to build the "action list" in an > application's jumplist *and* in the application menu in the top panel > of the shell. But after talking to Ryan Lortie later, it seemed that > he and Owen preferred using GApplication actions only for the > application menu, and that all actions in the jumplist would be > specified using the .desktop file. For my future reference, and for the Google, here is an example of doing this dynamic GAction + GtkApplication business. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=637334#c12 John ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Jump Lists / Quick Lists / Dash Embellishments in GNOME 3
> My takeaway from the session was that we would use a combination of > static verbs (specified in .desktop) and dynamic actions (specified > using GApplication actions) to build the "action list" in an > application's jumplist *and* in the application menu in the top panel > of the shell. But after talking to Ryan Lortie later, it seemed that > he and Owen preferred using GApplication actions only for the > application menu, and that all actions in the jumplist would be > specified using the .desktop file. As a follow up, I just noticed that this is the approach taken [1][2] by Ubuntu. John [1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Unity/LauncherAPI [2] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=642567 ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Help spot localisation issues in GNOME 3
Hello all, As GNOME 3 is fast approaching we want to make sure it offers a pleasant experience, whatever your locale. And of course we can notice some issues, but you have so much more experience that it would be a shame not to ask you. If you're already running GNOME 3, great! If you're not, you can give jhbuild a ride, be it the whole jhbuild, or the tailored GNOME Shell moduleset (see http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell#Building). Or you could use the live USB key Frederic Crozat is creating, there are instructions here, http://www.gnome3.org/tryit.html (I heard he's actively working to update it for 2.91.90, but the current version is already useful). Now that you are ready I'll explain with an example what you should be looking for. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636896 is a bug report about the new date/time panel of the control center, as it allows to set the date with three widgets, [ February |v] [24|] [2011|], and the order of those widgets doesn't match what we could expect on a French desktop (where we write "24 février 2011"). Date formats, week starting on the wrong day, hours written as 5pm where you expect 17, that's the kind of things, and of course there's no reason to forget translation strings missing context, but that's usual business. Thanks for your work, please CC me (fpet...@0d.be on bugzilla) on whatever bug you find. Cheers, Frederic ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: two choices dangerous for Gnome 3
Le jeudi 10 février 2011 à 00:04 +, Bastien Nocera a écrit : > On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 00:09 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Sandy Armstrong wrote: > > > As Johannes said in his email, bugzilla is the right venue. > > > > In defense of Sebastien, he has been proposing mock-ups, and no > > developers have been commenting on them there. > > Huh, I have. And they need much more work (as in, they completely ignore > any work that has gone into defining use cases). Coming up with mockups > while completely ignoring the work that's gone into use casing hardly a > good start. This is wrong. I don't know if you make error or if you lie, but is wrong. From the beginning, I'm based on this use cases list http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing And I have considered your comments. I remove the choose of the protocol using, I remove the Quick/Advanced mode and remove options windows. For the «And we probably don't want to have a separation between "file" sharing and other types of sharing.» I prefer to discuss this before any changes because I don't understand why is better. I have considered your comment, so considered and see it befaure make wrong reviews of my work, please. Thanks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: two choices dangerous for Gnome 3
Le jeudi 10 février 2011 à 09:42 +, Bastien Nocera a écrit : > On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 08:56 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: > > > > Dave Neary wrote: > > > In defense of Sebastien, he has been proposing mock-ups, and no > > > developers have been commenting on them there. > > > > ...where by "developers" I mean "designers". > > I don't think one needs to be a designer to see that there were problems > with the design. I came up with the use cases list, and it wasn't used. Please, don't say no false information about me and my work. From the beginning, I'm based on this use cases list http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing And I have considered your comments. I remove the choose of the protocol using, I remove the Quick/Advanced mode and remove options windows. For the «And we probably don't want to have a separation between "file" sharing and other types of sharing.» I prefer to discuss this before any changes because I don't understand why is better. I have considered your comment, so considered and see it befaure make wrong reviews of my work, please. Thanks -- Gendre Sebastien signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: two choices dangerous for Gnome 3
Hi, I agree (as is clear in the report) that the design is coming at the problem in the wrong way. It seems to be the old style "there are lots of useful features available in the back-end tools, we should have an UI for them" school of thought. But that's not the point. The point is that when we receive a patch, we expect developers to review the patch and suggest improvements. In this case, the owners of the settings design have received a "patch" to the sharing settings design, and it hasn't been reviewed by them. With all due respect to your design skills, it's entirely possible that all your suggestions (and mine) get taken on board, and the design will still be rejected. The best way to avoid that is to have maimtainers review submissions. Cheers, Dave. Bastien Nocera wrote: >On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 08:56 +0100, Dave Neary wrote: >> >> Dave Neary wrote: >> > In defense of Sebastien, he has been proposing mock-ups, and no >> > developers have been commenting on them there. >> >> ...where by "developers" I mean "designers". > >I don't think one needs to be a designer to see that there were problems >with the design. I came up with the use cases list, and it wasn't used. > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
