On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Gary C Martin<g...@garycmartin.com> wrote: > On 21 Aug 2009, at 21:15, David Farning wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Gary C Martin<g...@garycmartin.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Sorry, late to this party, but I've finally got a recent build with >>> Tomeu's >>> Ad-hoc network support installed on 2 XO's here for testing (no luck with >>> SoaS-on-XO-1 builds yet, but F11-for-XO-1 build 5 works well). OK... some >>> quick screen grabs and discussion. >>> >>> Here's what it currently looks like for an XO: >> >>> >>> Hmmm... 2 grey circles... Hovering over both 'grey circles' shows this >>> same >>> palette: >>> >>> 1) Is it a bug that there are 2 'grey circles' showing the same "Create >>> new >>> wireless network" entry? >>> >>> 2) The empty secondary palette strips feels like a bug, like some text is >>> missing. Should it be used to show the title describing the palette? >>> Perhaps >>> something like "Wireless network\nInactive" would be a good? >>> >>> 3) Showing grey device icons feels like the old NM bugs we used to get, >>> and >>> IMO is a bit of device icon design flaw going way back. Inactive/disabled >>> network devices should be just simple white outlines, as per other >>> devices >>> when not in use. >>> >>> 4) Obviously a new icon for when in ad-hoc mode will help, I'll try to >>> make >>> a few mock-ups and see if any work out. >>> >>> Really great to see we have 'kids under a tree' scenario covered again in >>> Sugar – big high five for Tomeu! :-) Looks like we might need to try to >>> get >>> some feature dispensation from Mr Release Manager to apply some polish >>> now >>> we are sliding into the feature freeze. >> >> We needs to stay away from feature freeze dispensations as much as >> possible. > > +1, but if no one ever asks for a dispensations (and I most certainly > haven't yet, as I don't have a formal proposal) then we live in an > inflexible sausage software factory. All I raised here was the discussion of > a potential of a change for some svg pixels and a (may be just XO HW) bug > fix (likely an OLPC deployment issue we would need community feedback on) > for potentially ~99.9% of our potential upgrading users. > >> Release manager is a hard, thankless job! And Simon is doing a great >> job at it. > > +1! > >> If something does not make it this release, it can mature >> and make it into the next release. > > No question, agreed. > >> The challenge is that in a project like Sugar, the _only_ authority >> that a release manager has is the trust and respect he or she has >> earned in prior releases. That respect is earned though successfully >> balancing that needs of individual developers (and their feature) >> against the needs of the entire project. > > If a stable 0.86 is never shipped for XO users, then I guess we (or distro) > avoid ever needing to fix this. I'm just trying to establish where the bug > is (2x grey icons, Tomeu's screen shots only show 1). > >> Let's keep thinking about how to build the community, work flows, and >> processes which enable us to double the number of new features we can >> add each release! > > > Apologies if I ruffled feathers and hit a tender spot, but open > communication is essential to community building, and not reporting feedback > is so much worse than not bothering.
No ruffled feathers:) But, I am a firm believer in the 'no smiling before thanksgiving' rule.... david > Regards, > --Gary > > _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel