On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Robert Bruce Park < robert.p...@canonical.com> wrote:
> On 12-12-14 06:43 AM, Chris Wilson wrote: > >> What are people's thoughts in this? >> > > I have absolutely fallen in love with the idea of hiding advanced options > in gsettings (ie, define a gsetting to control the behavior, and then don't > expose *any* UI for controlling that option). > > * Average users get a very simple, streamlined interface that isn't > complicated by myriad options. > > * Advanced "power" users get to be fussy and have all the control they > want over program behavior. > > * Options are configured with a standard UI (eg, dconf-editor), so power > users get a consistent experience here, and you don't need to add any > complex option UI to your own program. > > * gsettings schemas allow you to write descriptions of what the options > are, so it displays the documentation right inline and doesn't require > anybody to refer to any manuals that may or may not exist. > > > > > -- > ubuntu-desktop mailing list > ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.**com <ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com> > https://lists.ubuntu.com/**mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-**desktop<https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop> > Yeah, this is what elementary os luna has been doing with some of their new apps. For a good example: pantheon-terminal. Nice easy to use interface with no options exposed, but there are plenty of options in dconf for it.
-- ubuntu-desktop mailing list ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop