On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:49 AM, Matthias Clasen <mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:33 AM <mcatanzaro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 4:46 AM, Kamil Paral <kparal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > What is the opinion of Fedora Workstation SIG? >> >> Speaking for myself here, I agree with Kamil. We should revert this >> change until the mutter bug is fixed, at the very least. And I'm OK >> with delaying it for one release cycle after that to allow more time >> for testing. This seems very reasonable. >> >> Kamil, if you want to make sure this doesn't get lost, please create a >> ticket on https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issues and add the >> meeting tag. >> > > I disagree. This was not quickly committed without thinking, and I think > that is a somewhat insulting thing to say. I don't think proposing possible insult is a great way to deflect from the negative UX of this feature behavior, regardless of whether it's default. Default just makes the negative UX more exposed. And therefore there's going to be a pile on effect when users fall into this trap, and it is a trap. > > Why do you list a long thing of things that need to work anyway, since we > have a suspend option in the UI for users to turn on. Do you seriously think > we just ignore all these things because the option was off by default ? *shrug* My imagination did get about as far as maybe these things weren't considered regardless of the option being off by default, because it's not a good UX whether it's the default or not. > If turning suspend on by default is what it takes to get qa to pay > attention, > then so be it. Lets turn it on... Seems like an really adversarial way of getting Fedora QA to due enhanced testing for something. I don't know, maybe ask first? Maybe ask for a Fedora Test Day? -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ desktop mailing list -- desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to desktop-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
