On Mon, 2006-05-08 at 09:05 -0600, Jordan Crouse wrote: > On 07/05/06 19:02 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: > > First, sorry for the random mail to this mailing list. > > > > I'm the developer of gnome-power-manager. The latest mini-project of > > mine is to fix the suspend-hibernate nomenclature used by OSS projects. > > > > This might not effect the lowest layers of the stack (i.e. I want to > > focus on the stuff used by *users*), so this might not be applicable to > > you guys. > > I would say thats probably a pretty accurate assessment. Since you are a GUI > developer, you can tell the users whatever you want, and you can translate > under the scenes. In that case, using terms like "hibernate" makes perfect > sense. Sure, agreed. > But at the lower level, I favor a more clinical terminology, because it > reduces confusion amongst system developers. Thats not to say that our > current terminology is sane, (because it isn't), but I would far prefer > precise numbers over vague synonyms for sleeping. :) Up to you guys :-) > *Our* task, as I see it, is to make sure that the underlying descriptions > are intelligent and persistent, so *you* don't have to change your > application every time something a new kernel is released. But as soon as > we've figured that out, then it will be no thing for you to take an > "hibernate" from the top end, and turn it into the right term for the kernel. Sure, I totally agree the user shouldn't know about any of this stuff, but I thought I should bring the website to your attention to keep you guys in the loop with GUI users... :-) Anyway, thanks for this mail, feedback has been great so far. Richard.
