On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Olav Vitters <olav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 02:04:17PM +0100, Ian Malone wrote: >> On 3 June 2011 13:19, Olav Vitters <olav@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 07:57:18AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote: >> >> On 06/03/2011 05:39 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: >> >> ings. >> >> > >> >> >> I don't agree - I think the right solution is that extensions vie to >> >> be accepted as part of Gnome Core - otherwise its a losing battle. >> > >> > Extensions are maintained by various people. Further, they're called >> > extensions, they're not part of GNOME because for some reason they >> > weren't wanted. >> > >> > Arguing that extensions should be part of GNOME shell wouldn't make them >> > extensions anymore. >> > >> > Could you explain why instead of allowing anyone to write extensions, >> > you want to limit it to the ones with a GNOME Git account? In practice >> > it'll end up being just the one gnome-shell-extension maintainer? It >> > does not make sense to me. >> > >> >> There's obviously going to be a mix of extensions that are really >> extensions (things some people want that most don't really need or >> want) and extensions that fix things that are wrong at the moment. I'm >> hoping that the Gnome team are taking notice of some of the work >> that's being done and their next iteration of Gnome 3.0 is saner. > > No worries then; I'm actively responding in Fedora lists (and others) > while I normally do not use Fedora. Further, various extensions are > being proposed upstream (more exposure). > Though I'm not a GNOME shell developer, I do see the amount of feedback > they get and it is enough. I've noted when stuff has been raised before. > Note that if there is an issue and it has been raised, it could very > well be 'outstanding'; seems sometimes there is the assumption > everything is set in stone and so on. > > Seems the rest of your email is not about extensions anymore. I think it > would have been better as a new thread as it seems unrelated to the > distribution of extensions. > >> I'm currently dividing the things that irritate me into familiarity >> issues (not long term problems) and fundamental issues/regressions. >> Some of the later so far (mainly to do with the activities window) in >> short form: >> 1. Applications are now presented in a 2D array across the whole >> screen. This makes looking for something more difficult than scanning >> down a straight list. Particularly as the icons are really too big. >> Might look cool on an iPhone, less useful on a 13" widescreen laptop. >> Haven't dared try it on my desktop pc yet. > > I don't have any issues. Search seems nice. This has been raised before > though. Search is good for intermediate and advanced users, beginners probably won't use it. Also, does not always give expected results, especially if you throw in translations. > >> 2. Associated with #1, more mouse-distance and clicks to start an >> application. Bring up activities window from the dash involves either >> keystroke or mouse to top left (hard into corner or top left and >> click) then mouse down to application and click again. The analogous >> action under Gnome 2 was move to quickstart icon on the panel and >> click. Using the applications menu involves opening the activities >> window, moving (1/3 screen) across to select applications and then >> searching through for the one you want (see #1). If you want to select >> a category you've got to move across the screen again. > > You can make stuff as a favourite. Further, there are various ways to > make it easier if you want something quick. See also > https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet. > > This has been raised before. Having a launcher in immediate visibility is much easier for everyone, especially for children. Also, I can't find a possibility to add a custom launcher. In Gnome 2 it was easy to drag URL from browser to panel or desktop to create a launcher for that URL. It was also easy to create customized launcher for application. I don't see any of these features in Gnome 3. > >> 3. Activities screen tends to wait while applications are busy, on a >> dual core machine. This is horrible. With a busy application I should >> be able to move across to another one and work in that. If I forget >> and start the activites screen I'm locked out for a while. > > Sounds like a bug. I've seen some issues about GNOME shell slowing down > (e.g. due to Java bugs and so on). Please file a bug to ensure it gets > fixed. > >> 4. What applications are running? Hard to see if a window has crashed >> or closed, because the presentation through the dash collapses that >> information and mixes it with the favourites. > > I don't understand this bit. Please just bring it up @ #gnome-design or > send an email to gnome-shell-list. I think Ian means that there is nothing like bottom panel, showing running applications. > >> 5. What is the application name at the top right /for/? Clicking on it >> presents a drop down that lets me quit the app, but I can think of at >> least three other ways to do that in a typical application. It doesn't >> allow anything else that might be useful like opening another >> instance. > > More functionality is being planned for either 3.2 or 3.4. Either > something similar (but not the same) as the global menu thing, or > something more limited. > >> 6. Similarly the open-current-window feature of the dash is a good >> idea, but somehow it feels like it could be improved. If I click on >> firefox I want to open another window, not find the open firefox (it's >> a big window, it's obvious on the activities screen and in alt-tab). >> Yes right click gives that option, but this is a bit unsatisfactory >> for what is often the primary action. The Gnome people don't like >> configurability, but how about splitting the dash into sections for >> two the two actions, or splitting the (gigantic) icons in two? > > There was discussion about this, but not sure. At the moment there is no > infrastructure for #5 (jump lists / global menu). Pretty sure it'll more > thought will go into this in future. Ian mentioned lack of configurability and IMHO it is root of most problems people talk about. > >> 7. Multiple entry points into the same limited configuration menu. >> This annoys me whenever I run into it. Used to be the case in older >> distros, I think Mandriva had something like it, late RH / early >> Fedora maybe. The KDE on the oldish Slackware I run at work. >> Essentially there are lots of ways to get into a configuration menu, >> which turns out to be the same one. So if trying to change settings >> you spend lots of time trying to find an configuration editor to >> change something (see 1#, #2) and then it turns out to start the same >> application that didn't do what you wanted the last time. F12/F13 >> finally had some quite powerful and useful configuration tools. > > Could you expand on this? I think it is better if you can find your > setting right? > >> I think most of these problems could be solved if someone broke into >> Gnome HQ and confiscated all their touchpad PCs. > > There is no HQ and it is just a random collection of people whom all > have their own thoughts and ideas. Feel free to help/assist. -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
