Re: 3rd party application integration guidelines - how to be a good shell citizen?
Hi!
> Switching to another application is not exactly what I had in
> mind to get rid of the application. I still have the old application
> window around, I see it partially occluded behind non-maximized
> windows, I have it cluttering the Alt+Tab application switcher,
> the application overview and so on. It appears as visual clutter, and
> somewhat contradicts the otherwise distration-free design of the shell.
>
> I think it would make sense to have a special design for applications
> that users want to keep launched as long as they are logged in
> (because they perform some important background task or keep
> communication channels open), but only interact with once in a while.
Two different things here:
* Interact once in a while: This is a classic example of just moving it
to a second workspace if the window really gets in your way. Power-users
will most likely do this while non-power-users probably just don't have
that many windows that they really see a problem having the mail client
around.
* Important background task: As it is a "background" task you don't want
to have a window available at all times. Just don't tie the application
lifetime to the lifetime of the primary window. If you need
user-interaction (or want to make clear that the application is still
running) use the notification spec in some way. I think the new extra
emblems in the dash might also help here.
I know that these concepts are different from anything we did before.
But "hiding" windows often means that the user really doesn't find the
window anymore ("Where did this window go?").
I agree though that the empathy window is currently out-of-place in the
GNOME shell design but it will likely just be merged into the overview
in 3.2. But that's mostly because the chat stuff is integrated into the
shell anyway now.
As I said before, probably discuss the overall design in #gnome-shell,
they might have some other ideas. Try to see things not with "I want it
to look this way" but "I want a nice user-experience" eye.
Sorry for not having a perfect drop-in solution for all this, yet.
Regards,
Johannes
___
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Messaging Balance with Empathy
Hi! > As a little wish, it'd be nice if the use cases of 'old skool' > communicators could be considered here - i.e. those of us who use IRC > heavily. Empathy isn't very good as an IRC client for my uses - it's > clearly just shoehorning IRC into the old MSN/AIM 'chatrooms in an IM > system' paradigm and it really doesn't fit in. Well, that is a problem of empathy (though I use it as IRC client) and there are several bugs filed against it. > xchat-gnome doesn't seem > to have been hooked into the whole notification-area-messaging setup at > all...it'd be nice if that could happen. Or, of course, someone could > improve Empathy's IRC-fu vastly, or write something new and better than > xchat-gnome, or whatever...it'd just be nice to have a shiny new > generation GNOME Shell IRC-based messaging experience! I doubt somebody would want to duplicate xchat-gnome but it seems that it can be integrated, take a look at marina's screenshot: http://blogs.gnome.org/marina/2011/04/06/everyone-is-talking-about-gnome-3/ Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Messaging Balance with Empathy
Hi! Am Dienstag, den 19.04.2011, 21:42 +0100 schrieb Chris Baines: > I love the new chat features in Gnome Shell, but sometimes I want to > contact someone, or set my status to off-line, it seams I cant do this > from the shell. What is the purpose of empathy and what is the purpose > of the shell when talking about communication? Not completly sorted out yet. There is a (growing) thread on desktop-devel-list to resolve this for 3.2. This involves things likes "People" tab in the overview, etc. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: My first impression of GNOME 3
Hi! > On the issue of settings. Whenever I click on a mail address, it invokes > the evolution first time wizard now. Heck, I don't use evolution, I > write my mails either in Thunderbird or in emacs thanks. There used to > be a setting called "preferred applications". That one seems gone > now. Not even the gnome-tweaks tool has it. Does anyone know where I can > set things so that it sends mail *not* using evolution? It's a bit hidden in "System Info" but you can still set this properly. > One widget that I am not very fond of, is the ON/OFF slider. It has been > copied from Apple's UI, I believe and it makes sense on capacitive touch > screens, but on a desktop that I operate with a mouse, I find it awkward to > have a widget that I have to click-grab move around and release again. Also > when it is in one position and is only labeled "Off", does it mean that is it > Off right now, or that I have to drag it to the off direction to actually > turn it off? This was not always clear to me. I would have preferred a > checkbox, which is essentially what this is. On a non-touchscreen, it just > doesn't make sense to me. Besides that you can just click it (no drag necessary) there is some ongoing design decision about the use of the widget. > Last but not least, whenever the "Authentication needed" dialog pops up, the > password entry dialog is not focused initially, it requires a mouse click to > do so. I believe this was different previously, and I actually preferred it > that way. Sounds like a bug (probably fixed already). You may want to check in bugzilla. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: 3rd party application integration guidelines - how to be a good shell citizen?
Hi! (Probably best to discuss that with the gnome-shell developers on #gnome-shell but I try to give some feedback here): > 1. Be gently notified of incomming messages, and access the new messages As you say this is what notifications are for and that is also done by Evolution. > 2. Make it easy to get the application out of the user's sight without >ending it, so that it can continue to fetch mail in the background Well, just switch to another application. As gnome-shell doesn't have a task bar there is no reason something would be "in-the-way". > 3. Quickly and easily access the "hidden" application to start writing a >message or read up on older messages Traditionally you would use either the overview or Alt-Tab to switch to the applications. In case of a notification for a new message, clicking that notification will bring the application up. You could use a "persistant" notification to have the icon there as long as there are unread messages so the user can quickly access mail then. > 4. Have some visual feedback to see if the application is running in the >background (and thus incomming mail would be announced), or not Does there need to be visual feedback? I hope a user is aware if he launched the mail client or not. If he is unsure he can switch to the application using the various ways provided (or launch it). So overall, double-check the guidelines on persistant notification and you should be able to integrate your application well. You can also use Evolution as a (maybe not so shiny) example. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: UI Changes
Hi! > 1) Activities: Earlier betas had nice Activities pane with 12 > applications, places/devices and recent items nicely available with "find" > box right at the mouse tip as soon as you went to Activities. Now to copy > Ubuntu Unity, we have left edge bar with only applications and worst > "Search" in right hand corner was a bad change. As the search box has automatic focus there isn't any need to have it near your mouse pointer. The "Finding and Reminding" stuff simply didn't make it into 3.0 but will be available in 3.2 showing you recent files, devices, etc. > 2) Windows control: Now we have quite old-style, ugly-looking close > control only. People have different favorites windows control buttons and > their position. Mac-folks may like them onleft, windows-folks may want > them on right. Some may be happy with only close control, some may want > minimize/maximize/restore +/- shade, snap-to-left/right, if it can be > easily added. So giving users choice of how many and which controls one > wants, depending on how big screen and therefore window's title-bar is, > would have been great. => You can easily change it with gnome-tweak-tool if you want/need to. > 3) Scrollbars: Someone had written about that. Again for big screens, it's > size is almost a non-issue; but for small screens and particularly > touchscreens, allowing easy adjustment of width or even eliminating them > totally will help. Which Scrollbars do you mean? Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: using Gnome-Shell with 90% of all applications is absolute garbage.
Hi! > 1. Mutter absolutely ruins any decent graphical performance on either > system that i have been testing on. Even firefox4 has a severe > decrease in FPS in any sort of benchmarking. I usually get above 60 > FPS, gnome-shell less than 30 FPS Now before you blame that on the > fact that i use compositing in mutter or suggest that other > compositors would cause the same issue - Compiz++ (0.9.4) ~ has little > to no impact on performance. - Not on FireFox, Maya, Cinelerra or any > other application. mutter seems to be by far the WORST compositor for > linux, hands-down, even Cairo's is better. Please file a bug (against mutter/clutter) which exact hardware/software description and preferably a test-case. Mutter shouldn't be any slower than compiz and in many of the benchmark that have been published it has been faster. > 2. Realtime audio applications - Gnome-Shell does NOT play nice with > Jackd on either of my systems. In gnome2 - ZERO xruns, running > stable. the only exception would be the odd Wine VSTi, that causes > them - which is expected, usually on startup... in Gnome-Shell, xruns > are frequent... and generally is a very buggy crappy experience. > Gnome3 also depends on Pulseaudio - bad move! ~ PA while all good > and dandy, it often gets in the way of Jackd and many proaudio users > prefer a system to be "pulseaudio free", not only that but PA these > dayz doesn't actually work with some audio interfaces supported in the > linux kernel, as is the case with the ICE chipsets - you used to be > able to hack it Requiring a user to have PA is a dumb idea, and > should not be required, at all. Where does the problem lie exactly. All you mention (apart from the chipset support which I don't know about) is not a problem, it is basically that you don't like to have pulseaudio. If you have a real problem (bad latency, conflicts with JackD, etc.), please file a bug against pulseaudio. GNOME 2.x has required pulseaudio in the same way as GNOME3 btw. The volume control has been based on pulseaudio for years. > 3. Managing Windows/applications - I do like some of Gnome-Shell's new > style and way of doing things... to some degree. but, Gnome3/Shell > touts itself as being a better interface for touch interfaces and > tablets - i am actually finding this to NOT be the case. Managing > applications and navigation is often slower than gnome2, and as a side > note, navigating through gnome-shell actually causes some xruns on my > system. Back not too long ago, the old Compiz, may have done the same > thing. But now compiz+ does not, nor does Cairo's compositing window > manager... > > this leads me to believe there is something seriously wrong in how > mutter is implemented. not good. Again, file a bug which exact software/hardware description. Mutter/Clutter require a lot of driver features that compiz doesn't and as such often hit paths that haven't been tested so much. But people work very hard to sort this out on the driver site (as long as free drivers are involved of course). As you said you don't like to write negative posts it would be much better to describe the problem WITHOUT opinion on this mailing list as it greatly enhances the chances people are motivated to fix it. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Ubuntu PPA
Hi! > just a question... will there be a PPA which allows to install Gnome 3 / > Gnome Shell in Ubuntu 11.04 without breaking things? > > Currently the PPA says that it is experimental and as far as I read it > is known to break the Unity environment. I think when Ubuntu 11.04 is > out, there will be *many* people who will want to test how Gnome 3 > compares to Unity - but those people will surely not want to break their > system. Ubuntu people promised to fix the ppa once Natty is out. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: GNOME 3 from Fedora user's perpective - request for changes
Hi! > Do it now while you are still in early dev phase, so you can adjust other > GUI > design concepts and elements accordingly. Hmm, this made me smile to read it on day before the final release. Early developement phase ended more the 4 months ago :) Your arguments about RHEL desktop issue are a bit strange to me regarding that most gnome-shell developers and designers are employeed by Red Hat. I am not saying that Red Hat management has a big influence on the design but I am sure that they wouldn't sponser it that much if they didn't like it at all. For all other points you raise, see the mailing list archive. All these have been discussed here to dead already. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: No Phone Manager in Gnome Project?
Hi! Am Sonntag, den 03.04.2011, 16:32 +0100 schrieb Onyeibo Oku: > I've just noticed that Gnome-Phone-Manager is not in the Gnome Project > list. I found one in the Fedora 15 repos but it never worked (Crashed > 100% on startup). Apparently its not well ported to Gnome3. > > Are there plans to revive this sub-project or is it officially dead? This has nothing to do with gnome-shell so I am wondering why you ask this here. Anyway, the project doesn't seem to be dead as it had a 0.66 release just a bit more than one month ago. See http://live.gnome.org/PhoneManager It suggests to use gnome-bluetooth mailing list. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Make emacsclient an "app" from gnome-shell PoV
Hi! > I want to add emacsclient as a favourite. I copied emacs.desktop to > ~/.local/share/applications/emacsclient.desktop, then updated command > line. But after marking it favourite, gnome-shell will launch emacs > instead of emacsclient. Any hints? The filename doesn't matter. You will have to change the .desktop file. It has a line defining which command is executed and it is straight-forward. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: RFC: Tweaking tool for GNOME3
Hi! > https://github.com/nzjrs/gnome-tweak-tool > > It requires a recent pygobject build has been tested on a jhbuilt shell, > and Ubuntu Natty. > > I understand there is legitimate resistance to such a tool, as offering > multiple customisation options could weaken the design and marketing > message of the new shell. This is why I have not blogged nor posted this > widely. On the other hand, such tools will inevitably appear to fill the > power user niche so why not make the best of. I encourage the shell > developers to take it as a compliment when people express interest in > tweaking gnome-shell; it means they are using it and have not > reflexively stayed with GNOME2 or moved elsewhere. > > So I am asking for feedback, both strategic and functional on the tool. > It has a limited set of tweaks so far, but adding new ones is > straightforward (see tweaks/tweak_*.py). There is an "official" effort for writing such a tool so please contact desktop-devel-list because people will be highly interested and there will be not resistance. After all, this is nothing to ship by default but very useful to power-users. And technically, pygobject seems a good choice! Thanks, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Shutdown and restart
Hi! As you probably found out already, adding +1 on the mailing list has exactly no effect on the gnome-shell design. Please comment here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=643457 Thanks! ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Running Applications
Hi! Am Montag, den 07.03.2011, 19:33 +0100 schrieb Juergen Mangler: > Why not include "Running Applications" in Overview > Applications *? > Could even be the first section if it was for me. Hmm, the runnig applications are shown in the dash together with the favourites. That would be duplication. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: A few comments regarding Gnome-shell
Hi! > Also, I think it would give purpose to the top panel. Right now you have > the > application's name over there, and get a single "Quit" option when you > click > it, which looks sad and lonely to me. I don't know if there are any other > plans for that, though. Every application can add custom menu items there (it's just little used yet). See http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Whiteboards/AppMenu Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Window controls for GNOME 3
Hi! > I agree. As for progress: a message tray icon that subsumes longrunning > 'progress' (file) operations (copy, move, delete, download; maybe > update, install, for packages/applications; ...) with ability to cancel, > pause, restart? Wasn't this planned anyway? Some work has been done but is has to be finished and picked up in the shell: https://ssickert.wordpress.com/2010/05/09/introducing-my-gsoc%C2%A0project/ Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Window controls for GNOME 3
Hi! > >> * To hide a window in which a background task is ongoing. Minimizing the > >> window allows the user to monitor the progress in the window list button > >> (assuming progress is shown in the title bar, which ought to be the case), > >> and to be alerted when the task has either finished or encountered a > >> problem (when the window list button flashes), without being distracted by > >> the window itself. > > > > Which is clearly what notification are for and not the window title. I > > think this case is solved in a much nicer way in the shell than it was > > before. Might be that some applications need updates though. > > How would an application show the continuous progress of a background task > using notifications, or the messaging tray in general? I don't see anything > in the shell design docs that suggest that would be a good way to do it. (I > guess you could show a progress bar or something when you roll over a > notification icon, but that's not very helpful.) Well, IMHO I want to be alerted mostly when it finishes or when it has a problem and that's what notification are for. If I want to know the exact progress, that's an active action where I can look into the window or check the message tray. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Window controls for GNOME 3
Hi! > * To hide a window in which a background task is ongoing. Minimizing the > window allows the user to monitor the progress in the window list button > (assuming progress is shown in the title bar, which ought to be the case), > and to be alerted when the task has either finished or encountered a > problem (when the window list button flashes), without being distracted by > the window itself. Which is clearly what notification are for and not the window title. I think this case is solved in a much nicer way in the shell than it was before. Might be that some applications need updates though. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: The logic behind remove "Restart" and hide "Power Off" in User menu.
Hi Jon, hi Milan! > Le samedi 26 février 2011 à 12:27 -0500, William Jon McCann a écrit : >> It is also worth pointing out that you can't really measure waste in >> absolute terms anyway. Waste is subjective: it means to use >> carelessly or without value. I think it is pretty clear that, for >> many, there is value in suspending instead of stopping activities. >> So, we're spending a tiny tiny bit of energy here in the suspend case >> in order that we may save a tremendous amount of energy in others. >> That isn't waste - that is investment. > This reasoning is only true if users care less about power consumption > than about restoring their work. Which in turn supposes : Jon is certainly true for the lunchbreak-idea I presented before. I truely don't want to not save all my work and stop the computer so suspend is an advantage here compared to leaving my computer running as it would usually happen. But the other case is the end of the work day. In the companies I worked everybody closes all her/his work there and saves everything. This is also important because there is maintaince work going on at night usually involving automatic restarts and installation of updates (ok, this was a Windows environment). It is also possible that power is rather switched off during night because some things need to be fixed. So suspend isn't a very safe state there and has a huge power disadvantage compared to switched off state. Actually in that company it was even forbidden to keep your PC on over night and if you had to, you would have to put on a sign "Don't switch off, simulation running" because otherwise the IT-people would simply switch if off for you. So, I hope you understand that we are talking about different things and that it would be a good idea to have an additional (non-meta-requiring) button to switch your computer off. Thanks, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: The logic behind remove "Restart" and hide "Power Off" in User menu.
Hi Jon! >> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636680 > > No, that bug was about the menu item and the resulting dialog being out of > sync. Well, I can file a new bug if you like but still it doesn't seem that there is a good place to discuss this regarding the usual ignorance of mailing list posts on this topic which I can understand due to the bad signal/noise ratio. > There is some information about what we're trying to achieve with the > system stop options here: > http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Whiteboards/SystemStopRestart There is absolutely no information about why suspend is the default apart from telling that this is what happens when you close the lid on a laptop. I think you can argue that it might be a reasonable default for laptops but it is not at all a reasonable default for a desktop PC. And this is not discussed at all in the linked page. On a desktop for me there are the following links * I'am done with it for now (= I go home/out now) -> power off * I'am done with it currently (= lunchbreak) -> suspend * I want to install an update (= Restart) I never changed batteries in my desktop nor do I usually disconnect the power cord (though I switch it off to save the standby power of the ATX-Power-Supply and the monitor, which badly kills suspend-to-ram). Maybe German's are more energy aware than other people in the world but this is definitely common in Germany. And companies generally require employees to shutdown their desktop when they go home. Thanks and regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: The logic behind remove "Restart" and hide "Power Off" in User menu.
Hi! > Anyhow, this topic, as well as the one about removing the power-management > options from the control panel, has been discussed to death. The removal of the power management options is a different topic. Anyway, for the suspend button: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=636680 Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Window controls for GNOME 3
Hi! > I understand that the desktop icons will go away. But then I need a > replacement place where I can quickly access the documents that I work > on during a week. The current state is confusing: desktop hardly > accessible but no replacement in the sense of a quickly accessible > document working set buffer. Well this goes a bit off-topic the window control issue but the concept[1] of finding and reminding is simply not yet implemented in 3.0. Should be in 3.2 hopefully though. Regards, Johannes [1]http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Whiteboards/FindingAndReminding ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: missing workflows with gnome-shell
Hi! > Ok, we'll stick with dconf-editor at the moment. > But I have a little, slightly off-topic remark, at the moment : > Having something which default experience is classy out of the box > should not require "killing settings", just adjusting them well by > default. What's so bad about wanting to adjust stuff ? > It would be really too bad to have a tweakui outside the shell : it > would only be able to tune stuff that the shell allows it to tune, > i.e. not much at the moment. > It is quite odd having set up such an extension system and, > afterwards, having to set their settings in something external which > is outside the Shell experience ? I would like so much to have a > "Shell settings" inside the control panel ! > Don't get me wrong, I really like the gnome-shell experience, but I'm > puzzled by the loss of adjustability I feel compared to gnome 2 (not > to mention Compiz...). There is a very reasonable comment by a german computer magazin about this issue and why it is the right way. It is available in German only though: http://www.heise.de/open/artikel/Die-Woche-Gnome-weiss-es-besser-1183775.html Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: missing workflows with gnome-shell
Hi! > I just tried dconf-editor for 2.31 (the latest is building, thanks to your > advice) It looks a lot like gconf-editor. > What should be the default behavior ? > Should any user be aware of that utility, or should a custom utility write gsettings from a dialog box ? > Will dconf-editor be the default app to manage gnome-shell settings ? Perhaps it would be nice to have a gnome-shell section in the main "System settings" (gnome-control-center), and manage extensions gsettings from there. No. Basically any interesting settings will be in "System Settings" but I doubt there will be an extra panel for gnome-shell, it will just be integrated where useful. However, as of now, extensions are not seen as part of the default user-experience and as such won't be presented to ordanary users in the system settings. And you now, everybody like killing settings... Rumors are that people are working on a "TweakUI" like utility that will contain common advanced settings for people wanting more customization but as not even a prototype has appeared yet it doesn't seem to happen in the 3.0 timeframe (but maybe 3.2). Vincent??? Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: missing workflows with gnome-shell
Hi! > As for the settings, is there a standard gui for gsettings ? If not, would > a > small python dialog box do the trick ? Something like a list display > where > one can add/remove lines, and then, when confirmed, starts the appropriate > gsettings command ? The tool is called "dconf-editor" and is probably broken depending on the version you use. But feel free to write a more specialed python script of course. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: impossible to clone from http
Hi! > I'm behind a proxy and can't clone via git://. A few weeks ago, I managed > to build gnome-shell, replacing the git repos by http. > Today I tried to build everything again, but I cannot clone anything > anymore > : I get : > $ bash gnome-shell-build-setup.sh > Checking out jhbuild into /home/tbouffon/Source/jhbuild ... fatal: > http://git.gnome.org/jhbuild/info/refs not found: did you run git > update-server-info on the server? This old cloning caused a performance bottleneck. After some discussion, Olaf came up with a solution to allow cloning for people with proxies again, if they have an up-to-date git (1.6.6+). See also: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.devel.announce/155 Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Icons remain in notification area if application gets killed
Hi! > I recently ported krb5-auth-dialog over to use persistent notifications. > I noticed that killing the app with CTRL-C leaves the icon and the > persistent notification in the notification area. The same is true for > rhythmbox. This is unfortunate since the buttons in the notification > obviously won't work when the app is gone which confuses users. > Is there a proper way to handle this? Better file a bug in bugzilla before it gets lost here on the mailing list. The developers usually keep more attention there. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: minimize-to-tile would make for a more seamless experience
Hi! > ATM I find myself switching to activities overview very often just to > find a minimized (or obscured) window. As others have pointed out, this > has two disadvantages: Wasn't the original design to remove the minimize button alltogether? Haven't heard of this in a while though. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Some suggestions
Hi! > In a previous version of gnome-shell you could change the clock settings > to show also the calendar day. You could right click on the clock and > choose "preferences" and change something. Now this popup menu has been > disabled. There is a branch with improve clock features called "datetime": http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell/log/?h=datetime It should be merged rather soon as far as I heard on IRC. Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Some suggestions
Hi! > > - You should be bold and re-name 'suspend' to 'sleep'. I have always > > been confused by 'suspend', 'sleep', and 'hibernate', only to find out > > recently that suspend and sleep are the same thing. Surely 'sleep' and > > 'hibernate' go so much better together, and they are both quite > > descriptive words. We all know what sleep and hibernation are, and the > > difference between them. New users of Gnome Shell and Linux would be > > far less likely to know what 'suspend' means and the difference > > between 'suspend' and 'hibernate'. As a sidenote, this is more an english language issue and probably not worth discussing on this list. In all other locales the wording will be different anyway. But to be honest, I don't know where english language issues are discussed in GNOME, all other groups have their mailing list but apart from en_GB, no english list seems to be available. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: I forgot some things
Hi Jérôme! Could you please always reply to your messages in the same thread instead of creating lots of new threads. Thanks a lot! Johannes Am Dienstag, den 25.01.2011, 00:31 +0100 schrieb jerome: > I added on the right, the list of virtual offices in order to drop the > application directly on the desktop you want. > > PERRET Jérôme > > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Can't build Gnome-Shell
Hi! Am Mittwoch, den 19.01.2011, 04:45 +0100 schrieb Onyeibo Oku: > Gnome-Control-Centre is not compiling ... > > I get this error: > Entering directory > `/home/t2hot/gnome-shell/source/gnome-control-centre/panels/printers' >CC printers-module.lo >CC cc-printers-panel.lo > cc-printers-panel.c:28:23: fatal error: cups/cups.h: No such file or > directory > compilation terminated. See also https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=639885 Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: GNOME Shell on llvmpipe?
Hi Emmanuele! > as far as I know, llvmpipe doesn't support texture-from-pixmap, thus > making a compositor based on it fairly difficult. not impossible, just > unbearably slow. > > the same applies to Mesa swrast, which doesn't expose the required GLX > support. Quoting from the Phoronix article[1] (not idea if this is correct): "Fortunately, Red Hat's David Airlie has now created a patch that adds the texture from pixmap (TFP) support to Mesa's software rasterizer (the "swrast" driver). The patch was published this morning on the mesa-dev mailing list. David mentions with this patch he can "run gnome-shell inside Xephyr slowly. I've no idea why I did it, and g-s has other rendering issues under swrast, but it might be useful to hook up llvmpipe later. I've no idea if I even want to commit it at this point." This patch is just a couple dozen lines of code and obviously isn't really beneficial quite yet but will hopefully be once hooked into LLVMpipe and the other GNOME Shell issues are addressed." So, I guess that's the point to start *if* somebody is interested. Regards, Johannes [1] http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ODI3NQ ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Start a gnome-shell-extensions repository / module
Hi! > > gnome-applets was something you could install and later enable/disable > > in the UI. gnome-shell-extensions are there once you installed them and > > they may break the shell completely. As such, it is something that a > > "normal", "non-tuning" user shouldn't ever see because he doesn't know > > how to go back to text mode and remove the extension. > The same apply for gnome-shell, and I will work to make it part of GNOME > Shell 3.0 (inside Looking Glass, for now). Well, gnome-applets are out-of-process, they basically cannot kill the panel. And they are far less powerful than extensions, you cannot change look and feel of the desktop significantly. > There are various reasons for distributions to ship > gnome-shell-extensions (maybe not now, because we don't actually have > many), even if addons.gnome.org becomes a reality. > (And don't forget that instead of addons.gnome.org it may be > addons.fedoraproject.org / addons.ubuntu.com / addons.debian.org, so > distribution packages would make sense even in that case) Yes, they shouldn't *now* and that's why I think it would be bad to make the impression that they should. I don't think they should for 3.0 and we can still discuss about "useful" extensions for 3.2. I am not against creating the repository when somebody cares about it but please don't make releases until the extension system is in a state that distributions can use. I don't think we are in a hurry now... Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Start a gnome-shell-extensions repository / module
Hi! > > * No tarballs > > * A README file that requests that distributions *not* package it > > Sorry but I don't understand this. The whole purpose of this is having > extensions in distributors. Why shouldn't they package it? > (A different matter is installing it by default. And of course when > installing the package you should start with all new extensions > disabled, similar to gnome-applets behavior) While distributions seems to happily ignore those README files I see a lot of reasoning behind this. gnome-applets was something you could install and later enable/disable in the UI. gnome-shell-extensions are there once you installed them and they may break the shell completely. As such, it is something that a "normal", "non-tuning" user shouldn't ever see because he doesn't know how to go back to text mode and remove the extension. Maybe the lack of a disable/enable UI is a bug but I don't see this fixed till 3.0 and as such we shouldn't rely on it. Extensions are installed per user and as such package-management doesn't really make sense. There isn't (and shoundn't) be a system-wie extension installation path. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Somes personal opinions, ideas and questions
Hi! > After 5 minutes of the test, I don't see a "Shortcuts" section like in > old Gnome-Shell or in Gnome-Panels. It was killed or it's planned to add > this on a section (like for windows and applications)? What you mean is probably "Places" and "Recent files" and yes it is planned that those come back so I don't know if there is a final design. > To finish this mail, I dont understand the logic to put system settings > and system shutdow behind the user name (on the right of the top panel). > I think this user name must manage only what is relevant to the user, > like the "presence" (available, away, etc), change user, deconnect user, > etc and system (settings, shutdown and info) need his own button. (icon > and/or text (The Gnome logo?)). > > What do you think? I kind of like this idea. The user name is really not a good place for shutdown and there is a lot of space on the top bar anyway so that another menu with an appropriate icon shouldn't really harm that much. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome-3, First Impressions
Hi! > 4. Gnome-shell is not allowing multiple instances of an application. Is > this intentional? Attempts to open a new instance opens a running > instance (gnome-shell faithfully brings you to the workspace occupied by > the active instance). Sometimes I succeed in spawning another instance > via the terminal ... but replicating that success wasn't always successful. That's a design decision. You can use the context menu (right-click) of the launchers to start another instance. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome Applets
Hi! > Is it because I am on an oldish version of Gnome Shell in F14 that I > have a small sys tray area next to the "me menu" with all these little > gizmos like pidgin, monitor icon, volume, bluetooth, networkmanager > etc? Is that the area and functionality we are talking about and is it > gone in newer iterations of Gnome Shell? This area is still there but it contains only system icons (http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Guidelines/SystemStatus). Those are * Universal access * Input language * Audio volume * Bluetooth * Network * Battery and power (and they are only visible if you have the appropriate hardware). Erick was talking about other stuff that you can add to the gnome-panel which isn't available in gnome-shell. Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome Applets
Hi! On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 01:24 -0300, Erick Pérez Castellanos wrote: > Hey, you didn't answer, Is there anything design to fill the gap of the olds > gnome applets ?, like "weather", hamster-applet, inhibit-applet, dictionary, > etc. The answer was that there is the notification system (and presistent notifcations which have to be implemented). Otherwise, there is no replacement. Weather will probably be added in the clock dropdown. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
RE: Aisleriot submenu
Hi! Am Donnerstag, den 09.12.2010, 13:34 -0500 schrieb Mark Curtis: > Most people like to click around their GUIs even if a faster typing > alternative exists. > Proof? ;) Regards, Johannes > From: de...@spathi.com > Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2010 16:27:13 + > Subject: Re: Aisleriot submenu > To: gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > > How would managing groups be easier than to just start typing what it > is you want to do and have the relevant applications show up? > > On 9 December 2010 16:16, Rovanion Luckey > wrote: > > But it really raises the question: Wouldn't it be great if the > Gnome Shell application menu offered an easy ways to group > applications. Just as a folder in any file-system. A simple > plus-sign underneath the default groups which creates a new > group that the user is free to add any application he or she > may want to. > > > > www.twitter.com/Rovanion > > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > > > > > ___ gnome-shell-list > mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome Applets
Hi! (Note: I am not a designer...) > One of the ones I really miss is weather, which was part of the clock in > GNOME 2. The clock's part of the shell in GNOME 3. I think you can see > where I'm going with this ;) I don't see this at http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Whiteboards/DateNTime currently but seems like a place where it could probably end up. Really something that doesn't make sense as notifcation, well, "Warning: I will start raining in 10 minutes" ;) > The other one I really miss is the stock ticker... I could image a nice design just showing you stock value changes from time to time as notification (or threshold, whatever). Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Build Successful but cannot run
Hi! > Window manager warning: Log level 16: specified class size for type > `MetaFrames' is smaller than the parent type's `GtkWindow' class size > Window manager warning: Log level 8: g_once_init_leave: assertion > `initialization_value != 0' failed > Window manager warning: Log level 8: g_object_new: assertion > `G_TYPE_IS_OBJECT (object_type)' failed > Window manager warning: Log level 8: gtk_widget_show: assertion > `GTK_IS_WIDGET (widget)' failed > JS LOG: GNOME Shell started at Wed Dec 08 2010 15:53:56 GMT Try # jhbuild build gnome-shell -a -f -c Looks like you built against different gtk+ versions. There has been some API/ABI breakage in gtk+ in the last days. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome Applets
Hi! > Was gonna be of the gnome applets in Gnome 3 (aka gnome-shell new based new > desktop) ? or how can I mimic the functionality ? you know little programs > staying there visible for the user and easy to access. Applets (or whatever that is called) are not part of the gnome-shell design so they will simply not exist in GNOME3. Until now there hasn't been any advice for things that should be easy to access and are not part of the shell. Actually, the answer is more or less that there shouldn't be anything that cannot be implemented by notifications and is not part of the shell that should be visible all the time. In theory though you could create gnome-shell extensions that mimic the functionality of applets but there is no stable API for this. You can find more about this (with some discussion and answers by the designers) in the mailing list archive. I think the tomboy case hasn't been fully investigated yet. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: [Usability] Taking Advantage of Spatial Memory with the GS Window Picker
Hi! > I was thinking of having a fixed size placeholder for each window. > It's going to look like this > http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/9751/mockupc.png This imposes the problem that some windows (those that are very wide or high) become very small. Anyway, in the last days using gnome-shell I have been thinking about a possible solution for it. It would be nice if mouse-over in the overview would (after some delay, say 0.5s) zoom into the selected window to about 70% of the overview size so the user can easier identify a window. Some windows just look very similar (for example if you opened multiple terminals). Just my 2 cents, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: The Future of Window Borders, Menu Bars, and More
Hi! > Since we're talking about what's documented, I just want to point out > that the person behind the pdf is the same person who wrote about the > AppMenu. Sorry, got confused with GlobalMenu (what I thought that thread was about) and AppMenu. My fault! > > Can you tell us more about the issue with proxying menu through dbus? > Will the same technology be used if ever the AppMenu concept (with > more than just the existing "Quit" item, of course) is implemented? No the dbus stuff is used for libindicator (Ubuntu) and AFAIK also GlobalMenu. It is not used within gnome-shell which uses the new features of GtkApplication in Gtk+-3.0 for AppMenu. Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: The Future of Window Borders, Menu Bars, and More
Hi! On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 23:09 +0800, Allan Caeg wrote: > Been reading those docs, but I don't know what exactly you're pointing > to. What specific details about the AppMenu or the idea of doing > something with the menu bar are you referring to? It explains what it does and why. It obviously doesn't explain what it does not (appmenu) as probably few documents give a reason for not doing something. But it explains all the details about title bars, the top panel, etc. Johannes > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Johannes Schmid > wrote: > Hi! > > > > What exactly are you referring to? The AppMenu? > > > Yes, and the general design. See [1] for detailed explanation > why it is > the way it is. Especially the pdf even if it is a bit outdated > now. > > Regards, > Johannes > > [1] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design > > > > > > -- > Regards, > Allan > User Experience Designer and Advocate > http://www.google.com/profiles/allancaeg#about > +63 918 948 2520 > > ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: The Future of Window Borders, Menu Bars, and More
Hi! > What exactly are you referring to? The AppMenu? Yes, and the general design. See [1] for detailed explanation why it is the way it is. Especially the pdf even if it is a bit outdated now. Regards, Johannes [1] http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: The Future of Window Borders, Menu Bars, and More
Hi! > There's been a long discussion on this (see archives in July and > August). In the Ubuntu side of things, Unity's pursuing the menu on > the top panel. How about for GNOME Shell? > > > One of the most compelling options is the AppMenu. What's the status > of this in GNOME Shell? Have you checked the gnome-shell design documents and mockups? I think that has been discussed at lengths there with the conclusion that it is a bad idea due to various reasons. BTW, GNOME developers have stated a lot the proxying menu items through dbus won't work in all situations and is no good design... Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: GNOME Shell 2.91.3 released
Hi! > Although I have these errors(chosen option [2]): Choose [4] Start Shell and type git reset --hard HEAD That should fix it. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: What are the plans for Overview Relayout?
Hi! Am Mittwoch, den 24.11.2010, 20:53 +0800 schrieb Allan Caeg: > Is the Overview Relayout branch intended to be the default Overview UI > eventually? It will be the default eventually. See http://blogs.gnome.org/fmuellner/2010/11/16/moving-forward/ and the linked bug report where the patch review happens. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome objectives
Hi! > http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-853679.html > http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=57638&start=0 > http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1628158 You know that your question is far from neutral I guess and so are the possible answers. And of course it's far from statistically relevant when 10 people participate. > The Ubuntu guys who've voted a yes are bound to change their opinion > when they figure out Compiz will not work on Shell, and overtime they > will leave it probably in favor of KDE. That is your personal interpretation, right? Ubuntu guys will be rather forced to Unity anyway... Anyway, I guess everybody got now that you don't like gnome-shell as it is and that is perfectly ok. Nobody forces you to use it. You are free to make suggestions to make it better but please read the design documents before to get an idea why certain decisions have been taken. Thanks, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Fwd: Gnome objectives
Hi! > Corporates do not like Composting. In fact most mature people who use > PC do not like composting... I'm telling you this first hand... it's > the young people (for e.g students) who use their Desktops as a toy > are the ones who like composting. > > Your effects should have been limited so they look decent in front of > corporates who don't like flexing, twisting and turning windows, it > should have been made optional. Microsoft knows that, Apple knows > that, but Gnome does not. As a result MS and Apple have not put tons > of composting in their Desktop, otherwise I don't thing it's a vary > hard job for apple to port compiz to Mac. > > If Gnome-shell will take over, it'll be more like a toy than something > really productive. And when we talk about productivity, we don't learn > un important new things like the UI -- they should be standard. From your comment I somehow doubt that you have used gnome-shell for more than 10 seconds. It doesn't use compositing for more than zooming the overview in and out. Everything else is pretty static, it's not like compiz with all those crazy effects. Apple and Microsoft both use some effects in Windows 7/MacOS X and nobody complained. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome objectives
Hi! (Disclamer: I am not a gnome-shell developer) > As a long-time, advanced user of Linux as the main Desktop OS, I would > love to provide feedback on the Gnome Shell. I think it has tremendous > potential but the version in Fedora 14 is certainly rough around the > edges. I too believe that the project would benefit from user feedback > early on (you know, release early, release often). Sure that what this list is for though it seems that the developers in general keep more attention on bugzilla reports of all kinds. > As a user with good intents, it is quite off-putting to get the canned > response that the version used to file feedback and thoughts on > usability is outdated compared to what the devs are seeing on their > own desktops. It just does not fit how many of us think about > community development. It is unfortunately quite difficult to build > the Shell on the distributions that I have tried so far, and I suspect > this is true for others as well. If anyone is able to roll more > current F14 or Arch Linux packages, for instance, I think sharing > those packages along with an up-to-date manual to deal with all the > quirks to get it built, would bring lots of useful feedback from early > adopters. The jhbuild procedure currently fails on many steps on F14. It works here on F14 (two systems) without any problems. Can you give the exact errors you are getting? It's unlikely that anybody will be able to provide packages for a GNOME 2.32 distribution as you really don't want to update glib and clutter system wide or update gtk+3 on distributions that ship it already. > Even if the feedback from an individual user may have an overall > negative feel to it, please remember that the person took the time to > write and send it to the list because he/she cares about the project. > The desktop interface is not like a normal, stand-alone application > but something which sets the terms for all GUI interaction a user has > with the computer. It is completely expected that there will be > different opinions on how to design the workflow and solve problems. > The KDE guys experienced a major backlash with the UI paradigm changes > with KDE 4.0 and we do not want history to repeat itself with Gnome 3. > If the users do not seem to "get" a particular design choice, please > take a few moments to explain them. Gnome has made great progress on > usability, so I expect there are well thought-out ideas behind most of > what we see. I hope I didn't make the impression that the feedback would be worthless. But the original mail was to me like "You do everything wrong - I know better" which isn't a very constructive way to influence development of ANY project. There is tons of information at live.gnome.org/GnomeShell why certain design decision were taken. One might disagree with those but that would mean to really show off better ideas. The taskbar thing is very controversal (and has been discussed to lengths on the list) however, few people that actually used gnome-shell for a longer time have complained that they miss the task bar. But of course people are used to this kind of taskbar since Windows 95 (remember that Windows 3.1 didn't have that concept?). Nevertheless, even Windows 7 did lots of changes to the taskbar (yeah, called Superbar now) because Microsoft realized that it is hard to use which many windows open. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome objectives
Hi! > So, I've this mutter window manager running right now with this pretty > looking interface around... but where do I start?... where's the > desktop where's my computer... and most importantly, where's the > taskbar? To explicitly state if a corporate or someone similar is > greeted with such a UI like gnome-shell, he'll drop it completely > saying he wants Windows back. > In contrast to Gnome 2, you don't even need to train for the new UI > (of gnome 2)... it's so obvious and easy. Let's be honest, we tried to copy the MS Windows experience for ten years now without getting any real market share. What's the point in continuing it. Do you thing the iPhone was successfull because it was like all the other smartphones? No, it was because it had a new and clever concept. > Most people wanna switch between their windows with minimal effort and not - > 1) Move the mouse to the left > 2) "Guess" which one of the pictures is representing the task bar... > in fact he'll think the task bar doesn't exist. > 3) Move around the tiny task bar to select your one of the > applications which might be running on another desktop. The task bar doesn't exist. Anyway, take a look at the overview-relayout branch to get an impression on how the overview mode will look in the final GNOME Shell. > Let's look at the application menu now. The applications are arranged > as if it's a classifieds without any grouping at all... I have to hunt > around for my favorite application in it. This is a known issue and will be fixed until the final version arrives. > I hope the composting can be turned off for low hardware (I've talking > about 512 MB ram and a celeron class processor) Compositing is a key-part for the usuability concept and as such cannot be turned off. Gnome-Shell will work on any hardware sold in the last 5 years (with Intel, Nvidia or ATI/AMD graphics). RAM is certainly not a problem, neither is cpu speed in general as long as there is some kind of supported GPU. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Will traditional notification area be available in gnome-shell 3.0?
Hi! Am Samstag, den 16.10.2010, 21:54 +0100 schrieb Sergey Udaltsov: > This is not about my problem;). Many apps are using the icons in the > NA as "minimized state" indication, providing popup menu with most > frequently used commands. For example, xchat, transmission etc. How > gnome3 is going to address that? Sorry, short remark as I have seen your posts on several mailing lists now: Can you please stop top-posting! Please answer below the text you are replying to (you may shorten that text) so that everybody knows what you are refering to and the mails are much easier to read. See here for example: http://linux.sgms-centre.com/misc/netiquette.php#toppost Thanks, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Shell performance [Nvidia 310m]
Hi! > I would like to ask if there is a way to report performance statistics > and if I should expect improvements before Gnome 3.0. There are instructions for reporting performance issues: http://blog.fishsoup.net/2010/05/26/measuring-gnome-shell-performance/ Otherwise, bugzilla. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: mockup?
Hi! > Looks a bit Like Unity. It's just a new overview design that was presented by Jakub[1] at GUADEC and now implemented by Florian [2]. The official places for the mockups are: * http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-shell-design/tree/mockups * http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design Regards, Johannes [1]http://jimmac.musichall.cz/log/?p=1035 [2]http://blogs.gnome.org/fmuellner/2010/10/05/from-the-land-of-shell/ ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: some thoughts on gnome shell
Hi! > ok, notifications are now "less intrusive" but the problem remains: > the third image > (http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Guidelines/MessageTray/Chat) > messages are too big and if I'm working on a another program. This is only when you use the inline chat feature which means you already focused on the chat. Normally only a much smaller message will appear (see image one on mentioned page). > Notify > OSD gives less problems because this does not invade the main area of > the screen. TODAY the solution proposed by Canonical application > indicators and system indicators seem easier to use. If I'm not in > front of the computer and I get a notification (from telepathy) in > gnome-shell that is visible only if I'm going to search them right? > Canonical addition to notify-osd use other instruments (me-or > sound-applet2 menu for example) to provide a proper control system. The noticiations disappear after some time as Ubuntu. You can look for previous notifications if you move the mouse to the bottom of the screen. > Zeitgeist:The problem is not the UI but the code that deals with the research. > If I type in gnome-do "you" the first result is because the terminal > use this program daily. Gnome-shell offers me the client terminal > server, a program that I never use! Zeitgeist fix this limit That has nothing to do with zeitgeist and the search feature is being worked on so that it includes applications, documents, web sites, etc. > Application menu: The choice to use the favorites is IMHO a wrong choice. > The risk is that a "non-Power User" hard to find the necessary order > to work. the learning curve is too high today in gnome-shell. I agree > with those who say that "If somebody needs an extension or a gizmo to > easily do a function, we've failed." Gnome3 MUST be usable by all > without extensions, modifications, customizations. Today it is not > even in the mockup and the situation does not seem much improved. Trust me, lots of people use gnome-shell daily but there are areas that can be improved. I think the GUADEC mockup are not yet uploaded anywhere but I guess that will happen soon. The overlay is slightly redesigned there. > Application switcher:I do not want to make judgments before you try > the solution you are developing but the usual "not power users" > expects to have on screen a list of open programs It 'so you > always and I do not think that is willing to change medoto work for > "your fault": P The gnome-shell developers think that the applications switcher wastes screen space and I think they are right. Ever seen a phone with an application switcher? > IMHO you should organize an event to sit and listen. People like Seif > Lotfy, David Siegel, Andrea Cimitan, the people of elementary project > can perhaps give some interesting gnome-shell to make something unique > and great! Eh, yeah, that's why all of those attended GUADEC together with most of the gnome-shell developers. There is lots of discussion, still sometimes it's hard to understand some decisions Canonical did (behind closed doors). Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Active Applications list
Hi! > Lots of people are talking about a concern they have with the design > of Gnome Shell (for valid reasons in my opinion) and your basically > telling them to button up because your not changing the design . . .I > didn't think this was what open source was about. No, I don't. If you have something has hasn't been discussed in the mailing list archive, a new point or a new discussion line than feel free to post that. But as of now I haven't seen that and the designers (note: I am neither a gnome-shell developer nor designers) have responded to all what is currently discussed in the past. Probably a FAQ entry listing questions and answers would be great if someone wants to read through the archive. I am just a bit tired to read the same discussion for the fourth or fifth time now. Note that I also started one of these threads month ago... Regards, Johannes > > I'll stop moaning though, I'll be able to live happily with alt + tab > I just don't think the average user will be. > > -Sean > > > > ______ > From: Johannes Schmid > To: Giovanni Campagna > Cc: Sean Dunwoody ; > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org; Nick > Sent: Thu, 24 June, 2010 19:01:11 > Subject: Re: Active Applications list > > Hi all! > > That has really be discussed to an end sorry - no new points, see the > mailing list archive. > > Feel free to write that great default extension that will do all that > and will fit into the design and post it here. But please code it - no > more mockups, no more ideas, let the code speak. > > Thanks, > Johannes > > Am Donnerstag, den 24.06.2010, 19:13 +0200 schrieb Giovanni Campagna: > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Sean Dunwoody > wrote: > > > I still haven't seen a valid reason not to integrate a window list > of some > > > form or other, I know that Gnome 3.0 is meant to be a reinvention > of gnome > > > but I can understand why people would be angry, every OS I can > think of has > > > an easy way of changing applications (often involving a window > list) that > > > can be accessed easily without having to 'zoom out' of what your > doing and > > > trying to find the application you want . . . which can be rather > difficult > > > if you have a lot of applications open at once, and also it can be > very > > > distracting, there have been many a time where this has broken my > workflow, > > > and whilst I mostly use alt + tab I find it frustrating the way > that the > > > alt+tab in gnome 3 handles multiple windows of the same > application. > > > > > > > Speaking personally, I thought the same when I first encountered > GNOME > > Shell, and actually supposed that the then existing sidebar would be > > extended to be a full featured dock. Having used it more, I find the > > Activity overview useful as an overview, and got progressively used > to > > alt-tabbing to change windows. Still, I sometimes need more time to > > alt-tab than it used to take with GNOME Panel (as the order of the > > application changes every time, so you need to be careful to focus > the > > right one), but gradually it becomes so automatic I don't even use > the > > sort-of-dock I posted earlier in this topic. > > > > Nevertheless, I think you are right: the first impact with the total > > absence of immediate window management is puzzling, and therefore I > > would like to see some sort of default extension, that is a dock / > > similar system, that is not part of the core program (and thus can > be > > easily disabled, upgraded, replaced...) but still is distributed > > inside gnome-shell tarball. I can see the distributor doing this, if > > upstream is not done (assuming they do ship GNOME Shell, which is > not > > mentioned either by Ubuntu 10.10 or Fedora 14, both of which plan to > > include GNOME 3.0) > > > > > > > > From: Milan Bouchet-Valat > > > To: Nick > > > Cc: gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > > > Sent: Thu, 24 June, 2010 11:53:29 > > > Subject: Re: Active Applications list > > > > > > Le jeudi 24 juin 2010 à 22:19 +1200, Nick a écrit : > > >> I propose some kind of active apps/tasks list that is displayed > at all > > >> times. I get the feeling that the developers want to keep the > > >> panel/task bar (whatever it is being called) clutter free, so > they are > > >> not going to want program names splattered across it. I think the > > >>
Re: Active Applications list
Hi all! That has really be discussed to an end sorry - no new points, see the mailing list archive. Feel free to write that great default extension that will do all that and will fit into the design and post it here. But please code it - no more mockups, no more ideas, let the code speak. Thanks, Johannes Am Donnerstag, den 24.06.2010, 19:13 +0200 schrieb Giovanni Campagna: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Sean Dunwoody > wrote: > > I still haven't seen a valid reason not to integrate a window list of some > > form or other, I know that Gnome 3.0 is meant to be a reinvention of gnome > > but I can understand why people would be angry, every OS I can think of has > > an easy way of changing applications (often involving a window list) that > > can be accessed easily without having to 'zoom out' of what your doing and > > trying to find the application you want . . . which can be rather difficult > > if you have a lot of applications open at once, and also it can be very > > distracting, there have been many a time where this has broken my workflow, > > and whilst I mostly use alt + tab I find it frustrating the way that the > > alt+tab in gnome 3 handles multiple windows of the same application. > > > > Speaking personally, I thought the same when I first encountered GNOME > Shell, and actually supposed that the then existing sidebar would be > extended to be a full featured dock. Having used it more, I find the > Activity overview useful as an overview, and got progressively used to > alt-tabbing to change windows. Still, I sometimes need more time to > alt-tab than it used to take with GNOME Panel (as the order of the > application changes every time, so you need to be careful to focus the > right one), but gradually it becomes so automatic I don't even use the > sort-of-dock I posted earlier in this topic. > > Nevertheless, I think you are right: the first impact with the total > absence of immediate window management is puzzling, and therefore I > would like to see some sort of default extension, that is a dock / > similar system, that is not part of the core program (and thus can be > easily disabled, upgraded, replaced...) but still is distributed > inside gnome-shell tarball. I can see the distributor doing this, if > upstream is not done (assuming they do ship GNOME Shell, which is not > mentioned either by Ubuntu 10.10 or Fedora 14, both of which plan to > include GNOME 3.0) > > > > > From: Milan Bouchet-Valat > > To: Nick > > Cc: gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > > Sent: Thu, 24 June, 2010 11:53:29 > > Subject: Re: Active Applications list > > > > Le jeudi 24 juin 2010 à 22:19 +1200, Nick a écrit : > >> I propose some kind of active apps/tasks list that is displayed at all > >> times. I get the feeling that the developers want to keep the > >> panel/task bar (whatever it is being called) clutter free, so they are > >> not going to want program names splattered across it. I think the > >> solution would be to have smallish icons of the active apps/tasks > >> displayed next to the activities button. > > Hi and thanks for trying the Shell and reporting. This issue has been > > discussed many times already on this list though, and designers and > > developers don't have the time to answer again an again the same > > concerns. > > > > To be short: it's at the core or the Shell's design to work with the > > overview rather than an application list. Though the Shell has a support > > for optional extensions, so if somebody steps in and provides an > > application list extension, this feature will be available for people > > who feel the need for it. But not by default. > > > > Sorry to be quick, but if you want more details, see the list archives > > for the last few months: > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/ > > and be sure to read the design documents too: > > http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design > > > > > > Regards > > > > > > ___ > > gnome-shell-list mailing list > > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > > > > > > ___ > > gnome-shell-list mailing list > > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > > > > > > Giovanni > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Feedback on gnome-shell 2.29.0-3
Hi! (Note: I am not a gnome-shell developer, I hope those will also answer because I think you make some interesting points) > It would be nice to have a simple and visible way to disable > gnome-shell animations. Perhaps the animations should be disabled by > default. Well, besides the fade in/fade out and some little bling for the activities button there aren't really many animations. It's using opengl anyway so you gain nothing on the driver issues site (like you would in the metacity/compiz case). But it could be an option. > It is difficult for a new user to guess you can use the "find"-dialog > to search for a general string such as "game" or "CD" > or "spreadsheet". Therefore it is difficult to use the activities dialog > to find a program to burn a CD or to create a spreadsheet. > One suggestion is to add a few links such as as "office > program", "Internet", "video", or "game" to the extended application > menu. If I pressed a link then the corresponding text could be typed in > to the find dialog, and I could get the search results. That would teach > me how to use the system. Alternatively you could use vertical lines to > part the extended application menu in to sections. I think the text-entry is a but work-in-progress right now but having buttons seems suboptimal. I would rather use some kind of tooltip (maybe force when you open the shell first) to explain the field. > It would be nice to have more meta data describing each program. If > I search for a string such as "calendar", "schedule" or "appointment" > or "date" then I would like to find evolution-calendar. If I search for > a part of a mime-type such as "ogg" and "excel", then I would like to > find the programs that can handle the given mime-type. Guess that can be fixed with better desktop files. Probably a nice idea to file a meta-bug for this. Looks like a good GNOME Goal. > If you train new users to use the 6 icons in the activities menu as a > windows switcher then they may run in to problems as soon as their > browser creates two windows. The problem is that new users will not > automatically guess that they have to use the right click menu to find > the hidden browser window. Well, 80% of the space in the overview shows the windows on the right and that's what should be used to switch windows. > If the activities menu is open then I cannot press an icon to open > a minimized program such as empathy, gnotes, or > gnome-xchat. Ideally pressing an icon on the menu bar should close the > activities dialog. (Omar suggested that this was a gtk issue) > Yeah, that's not intended. > If I use the workspace selector and press in the space between > two windows in one of the minimized work spaces then nothing happens. I > have to press exactly on top of a window in a minimized > workspace. That requires me to spend extra time aiming with the mouse. Looks like a valid point, you should file a bug about it. I don't see a design reason why that shouldn't work. > Between the activities menu and the clock I found a widget dsiplaying > the name of the window that is presently open. Maybe this widget work in > progress, but right now it is not so useful. Maybe it would be better to > place a window list or a list of active programs here. If you are afraid > of using too much space, then you can remove the text and just put the > icons coprespnoding to the active windows. It's the yet unfished application menu. This will show menu items that work on the whole application in distinction from the normal menu items that work on the current document. > I would like the calendar dialog to contain information from > evolution calendar and evolution tasks. As far as I know that is planned. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Feedback on gnome-shell 2.29.0-3
Hi! Am Freitag, den 18.06.2010, 13:03 +0200 schrieb Niels L. Ellegaard: > Today I made gnome-shell work for the first time, and I have spend a few > hours toying around in gnome-shell 2.29.0-3 on Debian. It looks shiny, > but I also discovered some problems. I don't know how many of these are > fixed in the newest version of gnome-shell, so feel free to ignore > selectively. It not really makes sense to discuss things when you only tested 2.29.0 which is very pre alpha. You should at least try one of the 2.31.x builds to get a useful impression. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Gnome Activity Journal
Hi! This is nothing to be discussed here but instead on desktop-devel-list. See the threads there in the archive. There are various good and probably not so good reasons why in was not included. They are mostly technical. You can of course bring it up again there if you have read everything and still have questions. If you are a Foundation member (e.g. a GNOME contributor of some sort) you can vote for Seif in the board. Note that zeitgeinst != gnome-activity-journal and gnome-shell != Gnome 3.0... Regards, Johannes Am Donnerstag, den 10.06.2010, 16:27 + schrieb Sean Dunwoody: > Why on earth is the Gnome Activity Journal / Zeitgeist not being > included in Gnome 3.0?: > http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/06/i-know-im-in-no-position-to-criticise.html > > I've seen no reasonable explanation so far to exclude such excellent > work from Gnome 3 that I really feel is inline with what Gnome 3 was > aiming for. > > One comment from the article that I feel I'm agreeing with more and > more: > ". . . I think it is sad that Zeitgeist is not part of GNOME 3. And to > be honest I think the the reasons behind it are not well thought > through but again its not me who decides. Zeitgeist is NOT as file > manager but rather an Activity Manager. And although Shell wants to > integrate some of its functionalities its still just some... > I think it has to do with a lot of politics... a reason why i am > running for GNOME board it to ease the experience the Zeitgeist team > had to go through for other amazing upstream projects like Docky, > Elementary and GTG... > Yes we dont integrate fully with the desktop but lets be honest we > cant dump everything into shell. It just fucks up the modularity that > Linux is all about... > Like the aforementioned projects i think we are one of the last fully > community based projects in GNOME. GNOME has become a battlefield of > corporations and sooner or later if it does not improve it will come > to a divergence... RH and Canonical are killing GNOME and its sad... > RH should concentrate on doing services while Canonical should work on > the UX... this is the only way GNOME will survive... " > > Furthermore does this mean the task Pooper idea is being completely > dropped? It seemed to me that it integrated with Zeitgeist: > http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2010/02/task-pooper-could-revolutionize-gnome-desktop.ars > > > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Compiz and complexity
Hi! Am Sonntag, den 30.05.2010, 15:43 +0200 schrieb Frederik Nnaji: > well, true, every other distro based on GNOME has Metacity+Compiz > +GNOME Panel etc.. well, either compiz or metacity as both are not possible ;) I think that was what Florian meant. > > my point was, Ubuntu is upgrading GNOME with libindicator and > notify-osd, while GNOME itself is moving to an entirely new paradigm. > Or is the manpower involved with Shell not needet for the further > development of legacy GNOME? Well, there is not really a plan for further development of legacy GNOME other than bug-fixing and getting rid of bonobo (which has been done already). And well, legacy GNOME involves only gnome-panel and metacity. And metacity is super stable and slowly moving but still will be a perfect window-manager for a long time. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Re: A task panel
Hi! Am Samstag, den 22.05.2010, 19:46 +0200 schrieb Kao Chen: > I have moved the clock to the right. > And I add crosses in order to quickly close windows and clean easily > your desktop. > http://nsa14.casimages.com/img/2010/05/22/100522074150957498.jpg > You propose something like a coverflow? Well, I don't think that is good as the icons are to small to be useful. But again, the idea of some mouse-activation for alt-tab is good IMHO and I will see if I can implement something like that in the next days. I will probably be an extension or a patch not sure as a proof-of-concept and others hopefully take that to create the experience they want. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Re: Re: A task panel
Hi! Please, stick to the GNOME Code of Conduct[1] when writing posts to GNOME mailing lists. Second, it is a matter of being polite to use correct language and punctuation when writing stuff that others are supposed to read. We are not a club of script kiddies... Regards, Johannes [1] http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct Am Donnerstag, den 20.05.2010, 16:10 + schrieb kaddy...@gmail.com: > quote > Please, rewrite this e-mail using correct punctuation, full sentences > > starting with a capital and ending with one dot, not hundreds. I > don't > > even have the courage to read your message as-is. Thanks. > > > This is not language school... Nor a correct punctuation > contestDon't tell me how I should write my emails... > I assume you can read and understand english so just deal with it > > As for your comments about us complaining about the current useability > of gnome-shell.. I consider it > constructive criticism... coming from the perspective of an everyday > user.. if Gnome devs will not listen to the average user > then what? I guess gnome goes down the tube.. dot dot dot > dot dot... > > I have no programming experience as alot of us do not. But I can > surely tell you if something sucks from the perspective of an everyday > user needing to get his job done quickly and efficiently and to be > frank... the current statuse of gnome-shell just plain sucks... > nothing to be offended about... its the truth, and something needs to > be done to fix the gaps Mostly the responsibility of the devs > working on gnome-shell after listening > to feedback from the users and considering contributions that make > things easier like I said... I am not a programmer, but I have > sent design submissions that are more well organised > "design/usability" wise then the current state of gnome-shell > listen to the users > > kaddy > On , Tim Ryan wrote: > > I work with a group of IT folks and most of us are using Gnome on > > > > Ubuntu as out main desktop. None of the others have been following > > > > gnome-shell development or this list. I did a bit a research among > our > > > > small group, only seven people, to see how IT people use their > > > > desktop, and gnome in particular. I mainly asked them about the > window > > > > switcher on the panel, and asked how they were using it. > > > > > > > > I personally don't like the current version of gnome-shell, since it > > > > takes away too much functionality, and I don't see any way to use > the > > > > window switcher the way most of us use it. The window switcher > applet > > > > does not only provide a way of switching between running > applications, > > > > it also give you a instant view of the status of all the running > > > > applications. You don't have to stop what you are doing, they are > all > > > > there at a quick glance, all the time. I constantly have multiple > > > > windows up, and a quick glance at the panel lets me know what I > need. > > > > Are there unread emails? Has compilation finished? video finally > > > > loaded? To find this out with the shell, I need to stop what I'm > doing > > > > and go to the overlay, a definite distraction. > > > > > > > > I thought maybe I was unusual for using it this way, but three out > of > > > > the seven use it this way. I know this isn't much of a sample, but > if > > > > my little group wants this functionality I'm sure there are many > more > > > > out there that feel the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tim Ryan > > > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > > > > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Milan Bouchet-Valat > nalimi...@club.fr> wrote: > > > > > Le jeudi 20 mai 2010 à 14:33 +, kaddy...@gmail.com a écrit : > > > > >> I am very glad that you are satisfied with the current "non > finished" > > > > >> version of gnomeshell and how it handles window management.. > > > > >> unfortunately there are alot of other people out here who find > the > > > > >> current handling of windows bothersome, and not > straightforward > > > > >> its a hell of alot easier and > > > > >> quicker to click a minimised application to bring it back up > rather > > > > >> than zooming out and zooming in on the app, or alt tabbing... > while > > > > >> this may satisfy YOU it doesn't satisfy > > > > >> alot of other users hence an additional modification to > > > > >> gnome-shell to make life easier for the "others" such as a panel > dock, > > > > >> or the ability to click on the minimised app in the panel can > only > > > > >> be a good thing therefore people who are happy to alt > tab/zoom > > > > >> in/out are satisfied and those that want a quicker solution > such > > > > >> as clicking on a dock/minimised app in the panel are also > > > > >> satisfied.
Re: A task panel
Hi! > Would you please explain the reasoning behind the rejection of this > idea? In short, having more than one hot corner (even two is being discussed as a bad idea) is seen as cluttering the interface where I kind of agree. Still I would like to have something simpler to change applications than the overview with can be accessed using the mouse. Anyway, the way it works is quite nice on my netbook but I feel it will go into my way on my desktop but I haven't used gnome-shell much there because of driver issues. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: A task panel
Hi! Just to sum this topic up: I discussed this with owen on IRC and he doesn't think it is a good idea and as such I won't waste my time on it. If someone wants to create a gnome-shell extension he is free to do so. Regards, Johannes Am Dienstag, den 18.05.2010, 15:55 +0200 schrieb Kao Chen: > I am glad to see you love this idea. > But I just have some skills with Gimp, that's all. I don't have any > talent to make a piece of code. > I can just make a other mockup with an hotspot on the corner. > http://nsa14.casimages.com/img/2010/05/18/100518034733906311.jpg > > I have made just an copy paste of the actual Alt-Tab, but if we use a > corner, we can imagine it like a circle. I will try build an other > mockup but it should need more code to do that. > > An other things, did I need to add a new page on the design > playground? > And I try to connect me on the IRC but I should miss something. Did I > need an account or an invitation? > > Thanks for the support > > > 2010/5/18 Milan Bouchet-Valat > Le mardi 18 mai 2010 à 10:47 +, j...@jsschmid.de a écrit : > > > Hi! > > > > > Now that may be a good way to introduce the user to the > alt-tab interface. > > > Tough some might not like this a whole lot since it > resembles having a > > > taskbar. > > > > I like it! Probably the best replacement for a taskbar I > have seen (as it > > is no real taskbar to just a clever way to pop up the > alt-tab interface). > > > > I would probably give a try on patching this if there is > some feedback > > from the design team. > > I like the idea of having a taskbar too, at least an optional > one, and > it would be useful to test how users feel with and without it. > > But I don't think abusing the clock for that purpose is a good > idea at > all. If you write an extension to do this, please use e.g. the > bottom-left corner, which is a much more sensible place for > this kind of > thing, symmetrical to the message bar in the bottom-right > corner. > > If you want feedback from designers, best is to ping mccann on > #gnome-shell. > > > Regards > > > > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > > signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Buttons in Lucid Lynx
Hi! Am Montag, den 12.04.2010, 15:48 +0100 schrieb Sam Illingworth: > I'm not sure Ubuntu will adopt GS, as it would be too massive a > departure from standard desktop environments and I don't think they'll > want to make using Ubuntu require such a huge change it users' > behaviour. Although I suppose they could implement a heavily modified > version. I don't think this is decided yet. Probably they won't make it the default for 10.10 but as there is frequent contact between Ubuntu and upstream I doubt they ignore the effort. And I am quite sure they won't implement a heavily modified version as this is lot of useless work. Regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Finding and Reminding, tech issues, 3.0 and beyond
Hi Owen!
> What, if anything, gets pinned automatically is an interesting question
> - there's a pretty strong case if I create a new word processing
> document it should automatically get pinned. But if I save an email
> attachment, probably not? If everything is pinned, that's pretty much
> the same as pinning nothing. Pinning something to the desktop is making
> a "todo" item - it's something that you think you'll need to attend to
> in the future.
Saving an e-mail attachment is something I really would like to have
pinned because I always forget where I put it. Anyway, there may of
course be cases of things you don't like to pin but that is really
difficult to estimate before you have tried.
> I assume that by "the activity journal" you mean a UI like GNOME
> Activity Journal, and not the current GNOME Activity Journal? (It
> wouldn't really be possible, or at least at all easy, to to use a
> separate pygtk program within the GNOME Shell Overview.)
Yeah, of course I mean the UI of the activity journal (or similar, more
cleaned, whatever).
> My quick take on the issue is that its a question of density - the GNOME
> Shell overview is meant to make as much as possible immediately
> available to hand. Because repeats are shown, and because of the fixed
> time organization, the "activity journal" presentation is quite low
> density. This is even more the case when narrowing using cross-cutting
> filters... if I only want to see the slide presentations, then the vast
> majority of days in the last year will have no activity at all.
>
> But certainly there are cases where using episodic memory, where drawing
> the connection from one document to a related document is of great use.
> I probably can find my slides from GCDS pretty easily with search (they
> are called 'gcds.odp'), but how do I go from there to the SVG source of
> the illustration 'shell-components.svg'?
>
> If I could somehow pop from finding gcds.odp to a calendar/timeline view
> of all the times I edited that file, then it would be easy to find the
> SVG file. Ther are some interesting ideas there, and there are also
> considerable design challenges (a simple one is that there is no way to
> "select" items in the overview design - it's single click activation.
> And anything you put into a right click menu might as well not be there
> for most users.)
>
> [ Obviously related: "Search by iterative date comparison" in
> http://www.gnome.org/~seth/zuhanden-gnome3.pdf ]
I am really not a good UI designer but I would feel that a possibility
to switch between a time-based view and a flatter ("recently used" view
wouldn't clutter the UI much and wouldn't clutter too much. Basically
the two uses cases that you described above:
* I just worked on a document and need to change it now => recently used
view
* Someone calls telling talking to me about something I did last
week/yesterday/half a year ago and I need to find it => time-based view
There might be the need to filter things a bit more (search box, files
only, activities (e.g. website, chat, etc.) only.
> Would would a soft dependency on Tracker mean?
Not a discussion I want to take. Time for distributors to step in...
> What the central points of 3.0 are have to be based on how they fit into
> the overall vision. If an activity-journal like view makes sense in the
> overview, then we should implement that and market it for 3.0, but we
> shouldn't be forcing an activity-journal into the overview *just*
> because it's something that has been discussed in the planning for 3.0.
Sure, but IMHO it's useful in the overview (see below).
> So, if you want an activity-journal than there has to be design-side
> engagement to figure out how it fits in. If it replaces the current
> loosely chronological view in the mockups, how does it accomplish the
> same tasks? How does it relate to the "Desktop"?
As far as I remember the design, the desktop was seen as a place to
temporary store stuff. At least that is how it's used by some/most
people.
If we go with the pinning approach I would simply drop the desktop as
something physical and replace it by views that show what I would want
to see on the desktop.
Compared with this mockup
http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Whiteboards/FindingAndReminding?action=AttachFile&do=get&target=desktop-view.png
we would have
* New (or Recent, I guess recent fits better) - flat view
* Frequent - flat view
* Calendar (sorry, I am sure there is a better description for it) -
something like activity-journal
Short note on whether to use zeitgeist and/or tracker: It doesn't matter
too much what we use. If tracker supports something like an
activity-journal later (which was indicated by the tracker developers) -
that's cool, we can use it then. But it currently doesn't and it doesn't
look like it would for 3.0. So I think it's reasonable to use zeitgeist
for it now, as it can do all of those things. If the backend is kept in
a way that it can be replaced we
Re: Finding and Reminding, tech issues, 3.0 and beyond
Hi! > There are two basic approaches here - one is to avoid storing > things on the Desktop. Instead of seeing the Desktop as a separate > location in the file selector, you'd have a checkbox: > >[ ] Pin to Desktop > > (or whatever the designers come up with), and that would create > a symlink to the desktop. > > The other approach is when expiring or archiving to move files > from ~/Desktop to an archival location like ~/Documents. The pinning should be done automatically and the files should stay in the place I saved them (e.g. a firefox download should end up in ~/Downloads and OO.o should default to ~/Documents. The recent files should be stored by pinning on the "Desktop". > "Timeline view of files" > > For items that aren't on the desktop (the "slip") the default view > is a chronological one with "yesterday", "last week", and so > forth. So we need to be able to organize user's files this way. > > One approach is to keep track of user accesses and edits via > Zeitgeist (or in simplifed form by ~/.recently-used.xbel) > > The other approach would be to treataccess/edit time a > metadata property, and to use tracker to search over these > properties. > > (Note that the timeline here only includes each item once, > not once for each usage - I use "timeline" somewhat differently > below) Why would the timeline only include each items once? I really would like to see the activity journal here as it is so much more like people remember things. > * Using Tracker to extract and index metadata from files is >pretty uncontroversial. Using Tracker as the primary store >of information (such as tags) is more controversial - suddenly >the user's data is dependent on the use of Tracker. I doubt the latter is a good idea currently. > Concerns and thoughts concerning Zeitgeist: >The only think I can think of in the current mockups >that requires a Zeitgeist-like approach is the >"Frequent" selector. Without a longitudinal view >of usage, it's hard to answer "what are the most frequently >used documents in the last 30 days". See above, why not use the activity-journal? > * To a much greater extent than tracker, Zeitgeist is >is designed to require applications to be modified to >push events to it. Well, not entirely. You CAN provide extra data for zeitgeist but all applications that support Recent Files at least work ok. > * Zeitgeist is designed to be standalone and independent >from Tracker, but also used in conjunction. This, at >times, makes things not as good as they could be. For >example, Tracker has a pretty sophisticated system to >assign a UID to each file and track files as they >move around the file system, but Zeitgeist, which >identifies file by file paths will lose a file as >soon as it is moved - it doesn't piggyback off the >work that Tracker is doing. That should probably be fixed in zeitgeinst (or it should listen to tracker for such changes). It's a bug more or less. > Not much yet - I think it will definitely be hard to implement > our ideas without something that looks a lot like Tracker, and > since we have Tracker something that looks a lot like Tracker > is most likely Tracker :-) Zeitgeist seems less centrally crucial, > but there is a role for event logging here. Some of the more advanced search technologies really need tracker, I agree here. I am not sure if we want to depend on it hard for 3.0 but that can be discussed. But as said above I really want to have the activity journal available inside the shell as I think it is beside the shell another central point for 3.0 Most important would be to come up with a plan what we have in 3.0 and what we might have in 3.2 as I doubt anything will be ready by the time 3.0 is released. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Suggestion on window switching and other UI elements.
Hi! You should answer to the list (e.g. "Reply All"). > > > My apologies, I haven't been through the archives enough. I do think > that this is something that is needed though. I get used to new > interfaces pretty quickly, but a quick list of running applications is > something that I am really missing. > > I think that it would be best accomplished by adding a drop-down menu to > the running application area of the interface. So, you click on the > name of the running application (just to the right of the "Activities" > menu) and you get a drop down list of the open applications or open > windows. It would be best if it was ordered by last use- meaning the > application that you are using now is on top and it's name next to the > "Activities" button, then the application that had window focus last is > next, so on and so forth. Could be that reordering by last use is just confusing but anyway. This has been suggested already, maybe some of the devs can comment. Johannes signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Suggestion on window switching and other UI elements.
Hi! Am Dienstag, den 06.04.2010, 14:50 -0600 schrieb Sean Brady: > > 1. Window switching (I think that this one is really key here). > > > > I strongly suggest that a menu be given for switching windows. > > While I like the Activities menu and it's behavior with regard to > > display the open windows, along with the Alt+Tab, I find both to be a > > little more difficult to use for those of us that have 10 open windows. > > I also find it a little disconcerting when I have all these windows open > > not to have something that just lists them all. > > > Sorry to reply to myself here, but I was wondering what the list thought > of this... There has been lots of discussion on this topic without any conclusion yet (read list archive). I also feel there should be some other way than overview and alt-tab to switch windows. I would really like to have some broader discussion on that before 3.0, ideally some user-testing because it is a massive workflow change for many people. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Panel Size
hi! Am Montag, den 05.04.2010, 14:42 -0500 schrieb Tanner Doshier: > I was trying to shy away from a discussion on "general" > configurability (one thing at a time you know (^_^)), but since we are > going there...I was originally just thinking about tying it into the > current appearance settings GUI or at least exposing some gconf fields > for now. In the future I hope that the Shell gets its own > configuration manager (or the current one is rewritten) as more and > more options are exposed, but for the simple stuff like fonts and > themes the current manager would work. Assuming the panel would > auto-adapt to the font size. This also means the System Status Area > icons need to scale nicely (this area is still being finalized, but > something to think about). > Well, in the end I guess most of these settings should go to "GNOME Plumbing" application[1]. Regards, Johannes [1]http://www.hadess.net/2010/02/were-removing-settings-again.html signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Applets support
Hi! > Is there any documentation or API to get Applets that works on Gnome, > works on gnome-shell. If there is any I would like to know were so I > can try to help. I really miss the hamster applet. There are not applets in gnome-shell. See "Open Design Questions" at http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Todo but AFAIK it is not planed to support applets the same way they used to work in gnome-panel. JOhannes signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: message tray improvements
Hi Florian! Am Samstag, den 06.03.2010, 18:02 +0100 schrieb Florian Scandella: > 1) apply background to summary only > 2) add option to disable autohide Thanks for your contribution but it is usually easier to handle if you attach these patches to a bug in the GNOME Bugzilla[0]. Regards, Johannes [0] bugzilla.gnome.org ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: task bar in gnome shell?
Hi! > As the discussion keeps going about this hot topic here > http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1305154&page=110 > I know there was discussions about this in the mailing list but I > don't remember a solution to this. What was the status quo? > AFAIR, there was no decision. I think it would be very useful if people from ubuntuforums could help here: http://mairin.wordpress.com/2010/02/10/gnome-shell-usability-test-plan/ That might lead to some results what's best from the user perspective. > Will we have a way other than overlay and alt-tabbing to switch > applications? > It's quite likely IMHO. Maybe now that there is an extention system, people should simply do some experiements with task switching. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: Integrated decorations
Hi! > If so, I think it would be great to change this in gnome 3. Would that > be possible? We have a new wm, and a new decorator don't we? Could we > integrate them so app designers have the option of saying in their > application "if environment = gnome 3 then integrate menu/tabs/ > whatever into titlebar". I would like this very much. Especialy if it > was glassy :P I think some work in this area is done: http://live.gnome.org/GTK%2B/ClientSideDecorations Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: My noise about gnome 3
Hi! Please see http://live.gnome.org/GNOME3Myths because much you are taking about here is not true: * Nobody is enforcing gnome-shell * There still will be metacity and gnome-panel for non-compositing (you could use compiz in this environmnet) I can't answer though about the internal design but I don't see how it would make much difference. gnome-shell already supports "extensions" though. Regards, Johannes Am Sonntag, den 17.01.2010, 19:53 -0800 schrieb Matthew Gibson: > These are just ideas. Ideas are easy to come by, but the work to > implement them is another thing. I was just wondering what other > people thought about this. > > Here's how I would go about making gnome 3 given the know-how and a > lot of work: > > - don't force the gnome-shell package on people. (I know this is > against the gnome 3.0 goals - the idea is to give one gnome > experience) > - aim for making mutter the defacto window manager for gnome. (As > opposed to metacity. For compiz - see below for a possibility) > - 'modularize' gnome-shell into components, 'plugins'. Don't have a > gnome-shell plugin for mutter, have a collection of plugins for mutter > which together are gnome-shell. > > Here is how I see how gnome-shell is set up now: > > mutter = metacity & clutter - the compositing window manager. > mutter supports plugins > gnome-shell is a mutter plugin > gnome-shell is the taskbar, activities area, notification area, etc. > of the gnome shell. > gnome-shell supports plugins - using gobject introspection > gnome-shell has a bunch of plugins, both official and unofficial, to > change how it works. > > > What I would do is rather develop mutter into a nice, complete window > manager which supports both composting or not composting, and > decorates windows. Much like the current metacity. But mutter would > also have a plugin engine a bit like gnome-shell's plugin engine. The > gnome-shell top bar is one plugin, the activities (with workspaces > zoom-out) is another. The alt-tabber is another, etc. > > So that would remove the gnome-shell layer. Mutter would be the > gnome-shell. This makes more sense to me, the gnome-shell is the > window manager-desktop environment combination. Once gnome 3.0 is > actually released, users in general will use mutter, and may use > composting & the gnome-shell plugins. Or they may remove some > gnome-shell components, or they may not do window composting at all, > and continue to use gnome-panel. > > > > It would be nice, but I know very difficult, if the plugin system for > mutter was an abstracted standard, which compiz could then implement, > and the gnome-shell components could eventually be wrapped into > compiz, so that if people want to use that wm, they can. > Then mutter would have moved closer to being like compiz, but would > still be different enough to warrant another wm. > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: ? following Marina Zhurakhinskaya review
Hi! Yes, the old interface will be available as option for those who don't have 3D support in GNOME 2.32 (aka GNOME 3.0). I doubt that there will be much development besides bug-fixing in this area though. Regards, Johannes Am Sonntag, den 10.01.2010, 23:20 + schrieb Vitorio Okio: > In "The GNOME Journal" Marina Zhurakhinskaya in her "Easy Breezy > Beautiful GNOME Shell" article stated the following:"...[GNOME Shell] is > slated to be the DEFAULT look of GNOME 3.0 ...". > > Does it mean that the "good old" GNOME interface would be also available > as an alternative option to those who would prefer to stay with it? > > Could anybody answer the question, please? > > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: interapplication communication
Hi! > Well, the bluntest answer here is that if a window isn't important to > what you are doing right now, it's good that you forgot it! If the > person you are communicating with says something else, that will appear > to you in the message tray, but otherwise, the fact that the window is > open is irrelevant and potentially distracting information. OK, I think I get to the point now. Could you publish all this thoughts in a prominent place so that people who don't read the mailing list know about it. The current design document doesn't really cover these ideas in a way understandable for the end-user. Posting on Planet GNOME would be great for example. Thanks and regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: interapplication communication
Hi Owen! > Why "without the [overview]"? - I can think of several reasons offhand > why a task list might be preferred to the overview for window switching: > > - You can look find a window with your eyes and then mouse directly >to it. > > - There's less window motion, so it's easier to understand the >change when a window is raised or lowered and thus easier to >build a mental model of where things are. > > - The overview takes a fraction of a second to come up, and more >if the shell is performing badly on your system. Combining the three above points: I see a problem that at least for me, the overlay is kind of a context switch that I might not want when should changing the window (for example, checking the download-window of firefox, if the download has finished). In GNOME 2.x I don't have a context switch here - I just bring a little utility window to foreground with the tasklist. > But if you just say "without the overview" then you are defining the > problem being in terms of the solution; we can't discuss how the > overview might be modified to improve it, or what the pros and cons > are of non-overview solutions. Don't get me wrong. I already pointed out why I think the overview isn't a perfect solution by now above. But I will happily accept ideas that improve the overview in some way so that it easier to use. Let's see which solutions exist in GNOME 2.x to switch windows/tasks: * tasklist * alt-tab Now in gnome-shell we have * overlay * alt-tab I think most non-power users don't use alt-tab because they don't know anything about keyboard-shortcuts. I never used alt-tab in the past 4 weeks of using gnome-shell though I consider myself a power-user. Have you got any other data that says that people use alt-tab regularly? What I noticed though is for example that I forgot about open chat-windows or other things because there is simply no indication that they are there when you are working with full-screen windows which I do all the time. (Maybe I am a full-screen-nazi...) The window-list as some kind of help for remembering open windows is no longer there. What's the solution for that in gnome-shell? > Just because people miss the way that things used to be isn't by > itself a sign that things shouldn't have been changed. The real > question is whether people are adapting and finding new ways of > working that work just as well. If they are, then we need to figure > out how to guide people to those ways faster. If they aren't > then we need to fix that. Sure, if the new way is better, easier or at least equal it's fine. I just don't think that it is currently. Looking forward to your answers! Thanks and regards, Johannes ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: interapplication communication
Hi Owen! > In terms of this week and last week, most of the full time GNOME shell > developers are on vacation, and in some cases entirely away from > computers. Yes, we don't post enough here even at other times. Actually, I wasn't expecting any updates during X-mas but this discussion has been on the mailing list in different threads for quite a long time. And this discussion doesn't result in anything unless people doing the work will lead it in some direction. > Once you are done working through that exercise, the result doesn't look > much like the current GNOME Shell; you've lost most of the things that > are distinctive about the current GNOME Shell design, and the result, it > seems to me, would look pretty much like other current desktops. > > Now, the goal of GNOME Shell isn't to be something radically new and > different, it's to be a great user interface for GNOME 3, so maybe we'll > need to go ahead and make a big switch to something more conventional; > maybe the current ideas just aren't right. But we definitely want to > finish our current design ideas and get some experience with users > before we make such a move. (The message tray is probably the last large > remaining piece; we're hoping to get that landed next week.) Sure, user feedback is probably the most important point. (One of the reasons that I didn't post here before having used gnome-shell for a while). Regarding the task list I am all against a button panel but I still thinnk there needs to be a fast way to change the window (not essentially the same as the task) using mouse only without the overlay. If you read the archive you will see a lot of post dicussion various ideas because people are very used to it, even those power-user keyboards freaks. Just another idea that poped into my mind: What about having the alt-tab chooser as kind of dock that pops up when you move the mouse to the buttom of the screen? Thanks and regards, Johannes > > On Sat, 2009-12-26 Reiner Jung wrote: > > > > I guess these discussions can become somewhat cumbersome for developers, > > > because they are largely on the same topics. I think it would be helpful > > > to distill a set of use-cases and a set of solutions for these use cases > > > on the basis of gnome-shell. > > > > > > I suggest that we collect ideas on this list for problems we have > > > determined and send them our proposals. But to get features into the > > > shell we should not only propose them, but try to convince the > > > developers to like them (so they implement them). > > Two things I'd encourage: > > - When documenting problems, be exceedingly specific; don't say >"the new Alt-Tab makes it hard to switch between windows of >an application" rather say "When I'm writing an email in an >Evolution composer window and want to switch back to the >main Evolution window to look at another message for reference, >I often find myself ending up in a different application" >(or even more detail) > >Generalization from a specific problem to a generic problem often >involves making an assumption about how the situation is best >resolved. > > - The most interesting thing at the current time are incremental >ideas - how could the ideas of the shell be extended or reworked >to make them better? Such ideas are more interesting than >complaints about how the shell isn't working. And they are >more interesting than ideas that are massive changes in direction. > >If these ideas can be expressed in a few words that's better. >IF they can be expressed visually, even better. > > On Sun, 2009-12-27 at 00:33 +0100, Johannes Schmid wrote: > > > OK, I created a page in the wiki, it lacks the solutions currently and > > has to be filled with more data of course: > > http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/UseCases > > This page doesn't seem helpful in the current form; "Netbook" and > "Desktop Computer" are exceedingly general. Depending on how I'm using > my desktop computer, there are likely hundreds of pros to the current > GNOME Shell design and hundreds of cons. > > I'd like to have a way of documenting "points of frustration" - what the > user was doing (very specifically) and how the shell was failing. But > I'm not really sure the best place to do that. > > - They might get lost in the noise in the mailing list > > - Wikis aren't very good for discussion > > - Bugzilla might be the best fit, but I'm reluctant to have bugs in >Bugzilla that don't correspond to clear tasks - a patch to review, >a specific change to make to match up with a mockup, a crash, etc. > > I'll discuss this some with Jon when we are both back from vacation and > we'll see if we can come up with a good procedure. > > - Owen > > ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: interapplication communication
Hi Rainer! > I guess these discussions can become somewhat cumbersome for developers, > because they are largely on the same topics. I think it would be helpful > to distill a set of use-cases and a set of solutions for these use cases > on the basis of gnome-shell. OK, I created a page in the wiki, it lacks the solutions currently and has to be filled with more data of course: http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/UseCases > There is a document discussing the features of gnome-shell: > http://www.gnome.org/~mccann/shell/design/GNOME_Shell-20091114.pdf > > It is maintained by William Jon McCann and > Jeremy Perry . > Yeah, I read this of course. It's only discussing the alt-tab approach and the overlay. Regards, Johannes > I suggest that we collect ideas on this list for problems we have > determined and send them our proposals. But to get features into the > shell we should not only propose them, but try to convince the > developers to like them (so they implement them). > > Kind regards >Reiner > > > > Johannes Schmid wrote: > > Hi! > > > > I think you can/could even configure such a bottom panel in gnome-shell > > but it's kind of annoying because it takes up lot's of screen space. > > > > I am currently using gnome-shell on my netbook and it is really cool to > > have no second panel. Anyway, the top panel is mostly empty and that's > > annoying. I was proposing a task list like Ubuntu Netbook Remix is > > offering with icons only for the inactive application and the > > application name for the active. > > > > Anyway, I have the strange feeling that this list is more a discussion > > between users than between users and developers which is a bit sad. I > > would be really great if the core developers (Owen, Marina, etc.) would > > join this discussion more often especially in the way if and how they > > think some kind of task list could be useful. It seems that lots of > > people are really proposing it. > > > > Regards, > > Johannes > > > > Am Samstag, den 26.12.2009, 18:47 +0100 schrieb Marcus Moeller: > > > >> Hi all. > >> > >> > >>> I like the concept of gnome-shell if it comes to single apps, but I > >>> wonder if it's a good solution if you work with multiple different > >>> apps. E.g. if you want to drag and drop files between two nautilus > >>> windows, you can choose between resizing both windows, placing them > >>> side by side or using Alt+Tab to toggle between them. > >>> > >>> I know, one of the main arguments is that the application itself > >>> should offer things like tabbed browsing, but what about interprocess > >>> communication between totally different apps? > >>> > >> To line out what I would prefer I have attached a screenshot. (Did not > >> managed to get the color of the bottom panel matching :)) > >> > >> Best Regards > >> Marcus > >> ___ > >> gnome-shell-list mailing list > >> gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > >> http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > >> > > > > > > ___ > > gnome-shell-list mailing list > > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > > > > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list > ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: interapplication communication
Hi! I think you can/could even configure such a bottom panel in gnome-shell but it's kind of annoying because it takes up lot's of screen space. I am currently using gnome-shell on my netbook and it is really cool to have no second panel. Anyway, the top panel is mostly empty and that's annoying. I was proposing a task list like Ubuntu Netbook Remix is offering with icons only for the inactive application and the application name for the active. Anyway, I have the strange feeling that this list is more a discussion between users than between users and developers which is a bit sad. I would be really great if the core developers (Owen, Marina, etc.) would join this discussion more often especially in the way if and how they think some kind of task list could be useful. It seems that lots of people are really proposing it. Regards, Johannes Am Samstag, den 26.12.2009, 18:47 +0100 schrieb Marcus Moeller: > Hi all. > > > I like the concept of gnome-shell if it comes to single apps, but I > > wonder if it's a good solution if you work with multiple different > > apps. E.g. if you want to drag and drop files between two nautilus > > windows, you can choose between resizing both windows, placing them > > side by side or using Alt+Tab to toggle between them. > > > > I know, one of the main arguments is that the application itself > > should offer things like tabbed browsing, but what about interprocess > > communication between totally different apps? > > To line out what I would prefer I have attached a screenshot. (Did not > managed to get the color of the bottom panel matching :)) > > Best Regards > Marcus > ___ > gnome-shell-list mailing list > gnome-shell-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
Re: a note on application-based window-management behavior
Hi! > So, closing the last Brasero window means that opening a new one > requires re-launching the App, and any quick tasks such as "Burn > Image..." or whatever Brasero function may be integrated into G-Shell > require the same [or may not even be available, if integrated G-Shell > Application commands are only shown while the App is running]. > Such things should be implemented as a dbus service or library and most are already. I don't think it would be a good solution to keep Apps around when the user closed them as it is unpredictable what the user does next most of the time. Regards, Johannes signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ gnome-shell-list mailing list gnome-shell-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
