On jeu., 2010-05-20 at 09:27 +0200, Torsten Landschoff wrote: > Having to fight the system to tell it that the network is in fact > available feels like the worst days of Windows usage for me. Can we stop > going that "user-friendly" route?
Like it or not, people do want that. And, as you noticed, you're not forced to use network-manager (as a matter of fact, I don't, which is why I didn't really detected the network-manager support was disabled in 2.28). > > I am not directly opposed to using network-manager as indication that > the system is offline. However, it should be easy to find out (using a > tooltip on the grayed menu entry, anything that pops up automatically). > I consider refusing to work without any indication as quite childish. If it's just an indication, it's useless. As I see it, the goal is to prevent unneeded, time/power/cpu/network consuming connection, when you know there's no chance they'll survive. If you don't like being patronized (which I can get), yes, you should get rid of network-manager. Now, maybe an indication in the menu saying why evolution is offline might be helpful (though “offline because offline” might not exactly be helpful, and afaiui the system offline state could be set by something else than network-manager). Please report upstream issues like this directly on upstream bugzilla, I don't have time to handle all bug reports on evolution stack, sorry. Cheers, -- Yves-Alexis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
