On 2008-03-06, 11:34 GMT, Lennart Poettering wrote: > "IPv4LL" is as "gnomeish" as "DHCP" is. There are RFCs named > after both of the terms. Yes, and I hate whenever DHCP turns in any window or menu or dialog. Wasn't the main goal of DHCP to make networking invisible (kind of Zeroconf 0.1 ;-)?). (Letter A randomly inserted to satisfy my three-years old daughter ;-)) > So, if you don't want to see "IPv4LL", then what would you suggest as > a replacement for the string "DHCP"? I would love not to see these in any menu or dialog at all, if possible. > Quite frankly, if you are configuring your network in such a > professional way that you actually might play with these options you > should be grown up enough to deal with the real terms and actually > also *want* to deal with them. Agree, which probably makes all my complaints moot. > This blog story of Havoc's is related to this discussion: > > http://log.ometer.com/2008-03.html#5 No, I wasn't suggesting for a second that users are stupid. I was thinking more about “Designing for People Who Have Better Things To Do With Their Lives Than Operate Your Software” (http://www.joelonsoftware.com/uibook/fog0000000249.html) I thought that mantra “Every time you provide an option, you're asking the user to make a decision.” (or even s/asking/forcing/) would be a good for Gnome design philosophy, right? But, yes, probably this is such a minor thing, that it doesn’t matter that much. Matej -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
