On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:18:53 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote: > IMO the main problem in design is that PK only allows to search for > names, The it ought to get fixed. > In a perfect world (TM) you could also search for "file manger" or "word > processor" and then select one from the results given. Great! :) > And then it would > IMO perfectly make sense to have the app name in the summary because > otherwise a search for "file manger" would most likely return a bunch > of ... well... "file managers". Not so great anymore, because (1) the pkg name usually bears a striking resemblance with the app name, and (2) there have been cases already where users failed to find an app when searching for the app name in package names. Example: kmail and other KDE apps, which are found in packages that have a completely different name. You cannot squeeze the name of all apps into the summary just to serve those users who search for app names. > I don't think that a name or brand scares anybody. I > could argue that with a lot of "file managers" they are afraid of > choosing the wrong one. Perhaps because it comes with a text-based interface only and the summary doesn't mention that? ;) [Thunar] > > Not specific, but its FAQ says "... with a special focus on the Xfce > > DE". And the first line of the description says: > > > > Thunar is a new modern file manager for the Xfce Desktop Environment. > > <bikeshed> I guess we could argue about the words "new" and "modern" > </bikeshed> Certainly. ;) This the the current %description of the Fedora pkg, however. > > Just "File manager" is fine, too. > > But then we are over-simplifying the summaries. If we carry on like > this, one day we only have "text editors" "file managers" and "word > processors" left. What's wrong with that? There will still be some apps that don't offer a GUI, and that would be a good reason to mention that in the summary. Don't forget that for more verbosity, the user could display the description. There are other package details a package management GUI might hide by default (%version and %release, for example), mc : User-friendly text console file manager and visual shell A "visual shell", haha! > > trademarks make ordinary users nervous. Have you ever met users who > > would > > ask "What is an AbiWord word processor?" while looking for a "normal" > > word > > processor? > > No, but I'm sure everybody recognizes AbiWord as a name and not as a > general term. We live in a world of names and brands, as Andrea already > said. Sure, but what makes it so special as to mention it? Do you need to know what AbiWord is? texlive - Binaries for the TeX formatting system You better stay away from it unless you have an idea what TeX and/or LaTeX are. emacs - GNU Emacs text editor Can it edit only Emacs text files? I would change the summary to Versatile text editor or Customizable text editor vim - A version of the VIM editor which includes recent enhancements Only the description explains what "VIM" means. Without that knowledge, this summary is less helpful, as VIM could be a special data file format, for example. > Sorry to say that, but I think your examples are a very quixotic. I have > never seen someone who has been surfing the internet with web browser > that is started automatically. This is splitting-hairs. Let them switch between IE and Firefox and Opera, change the desktop icon and title, which they click usually to start the browser - there are enough ways to confuse non-geeks or newbies. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
