On Sat, 2011-06-18 at 00:30 +0900, 夜神 岩男 wrote: > On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 10:04 -0400, Bernd Stramm wrote: > > On Fri, 17 Jun 2011 19:33:18 +0900 > > 夜神 岩男 <supergiantpotato@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > Considering the frequent calls of "Gnome 3 has failed at its task" or > > > the "GUI has failed if the user must ____" makes me wonder: Where is > > > the task definition or specification against which the implementation > > > has failed? > > > > > > "Doesn't live up to my expectation" is very different from "Doesn't > > > comply with spec" and both are different from "Is a bad design". > > > > How about a spec then of what Gnome3 was trying to achiece, and how > > about those who like it telling us how Gnome3 achieved those things? > > And this is precisely my point. At the moment criticism and defense both > seem a bit aimless because we aren't seeing any references to the > interface research someone said happened, interface specifications or > even a concept discussion/summary about what gnome-shell was supposed to > achieve. It was a serious undertaking, so I'm certain they had goals > which were at least clear to someone at some point. https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/ and all the links listed at the end of that page. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
