Hey, slightly random, but could I suggest putting synchronous bubbles
a bit above the bottom edge at the horizontal centre? (Where there
used to be a popup for adjusting volume and brightness). I think there
may have been some reason behind that approach :)
Jumping late to the discussion,
The concept involved in volume and brightness gauges is different from
regular notifications to the point I don't feel confortable in using the
word notifications at all. I can't be notified of something I *expect*
to see. I think feedback is a more appropriate world.
Oops, I noticed now
It sounds like this is putting the horse before the bit -- there is still a
lot of turmoil out there regarding NotifyOSD's positioning. The Work for
Lucid section *should* say something more like
Positioning: Determine the driving requirements for notification bubble
positioning and separate
Here's an interesting quote from a user from the bug report:
"Having
read this head to tail I see that the discussion is becoming repetitive
and not bringing nothing new, I think we should push it into a more
constructive direction. I will summarize the most important points that
have been
On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 09:24 +0100, Luke Benstead wrote:
Finally, in the notification bubble we can make the text slide
up, rather than jump up, and also fiddle with the display time and the
width of the bubble (so more text fits on a single line).
The width of the bubbles is probably not
Brett Cornwall wrote:
It all boils down to customization. I really feel that the way to make
everyone happy is to have reasonable configuration for notify-OSD.
Being able to choose the position easily and whether the policy is
fixed or dynamic would allow peace to any that are dissatisfied.
I quote Mark from earlier in this list:
There's always a temptation, when two smart and well-meaning people can't
agree, to add an option so they can both get what they want. It costs
nothing to add the checkbox, and it creates the illusion of consensus
because we can each have what we want which
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 13:37 +0200, Victor wrote:
I quote Mark from earlier in this list:
There's always a temptation, when two smart and well-meaning people
can't agree, to add an option so they can both get what they want. It
costs nothing to add the checkbox, and it creates the illusion of
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Martin Owens docto...@gmail.com wrote:
[...] The first thing I've noticed from this experimental opinionated
stance is a tendency to alienate and frustrate people who want to
collaborate. There are people who will give up their personal visions
for yours
Martin Owens wrote:
Hello Mark,
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 11:09 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
First, we get much better collaboration and communication,
Do we? The first thing I've noticed from this experimental opinionated
stance is a tendency to alienate and frustrate people who
Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
A guiding principle in Ayatana is to *reduce* customisation, not
increase it.
Then I am afraid that you are going to lose a lot of interest from lots
of people. I really do understand your intentions, and I think they are
wonderful, but there is a happy
In general, no. If the ideas they express are better, but the metrics we can
bring to bear (including the view of the people to whom the design
leadership has been given) then those patches can be included without
options, the default behaviour will be improved for all. If they just create
2009/10/21 Paulo J. S. Silva pjssi...@ime.usp.br
In my humble opinion this is one of best ways to end a conversation:
takes your opponent point of view and turn it into a caricature that
make it sound unreasonable.
Well, I thing exposing the weaknesses in other people's argumentation is at
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:16 PM, Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com wrote:
[...] I think the reason that notify-osd's positioning is a particular
sticking point with many people is that it is something where no
default location will suit the majority of people. Users with visual
problems,
So, probably, the solution is rather to find some clever algorithm that
places them dynamically based on the current desktop conditions, but we
won't be motivated to search for this algorithm if we resort to creating
more options as soon as someone complaints.
Heh, OK you've almost won me
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 13:02 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
Sometimes folks actually want to push their own ideas, and think
that's collaboration. That's not going to work here, because we have a
core driver already.
There is a difference between push and contribute. It's typically in
the
Luke Benstead wrote:
The only thing against that is what Mark said about the async
notifications growing upwards, but I still don't see why that's a
problem (it would look pretty cool if the existing text moved up, then
the new line faded in below).
That would be worth a flash mockup, or code
Jim Rorie wrote:
I notice that you don't insist upon one application per
function available in the repositories or launchpad PPAs.
Of course not. Nor would I resist there being many branches of
notify-osd. But I will resist calls for this should be an option.
And if
2009/10/21 Mark Shuttleworth m...@ubuntu.com:
Luke Benstead wrote:
The only thing against that is what Mark said about the async
notifications growing upwards, but I still don't see why that's a
problem (it would look pretty cool if the existing text moved up, then
the new line faded in
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 13:29 -0400, Jim Rorie wrote:
I'm not talking about visible checkboxes or customization
applications.
Don't go the KDE route. Give power users/admins access to gconf for a
few variables that could have a big impact on user experience.
As a developer on the DX team doing
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 18:09 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
That would be worth a flash mockup, or code mockup, to see in
practice.
Hi,
Here is a tentative clutter mockup:
http://bitbucket.org/proppy/clutter-repl/raw/2f7b36efb1fe/logs/session13.ogv
Luke, let me know if it implements
2009/10/21 Johan Euphrosine pro...@aminche.com:
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 18:09 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
That would be worth a flash mockup, or code mockup, to see in
practice.
Hi,
Here is a tentative clutter mockup:
2009/10/21 Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com:
You legend! Yeah, exactly that kind of thing, I think it would look pretty
cool.
Thanks a lot!
So, good idea?
Are you actually suggesting that messages that stay visible for longer
should bob up and down depending on whether there is a newer
2009/10/21 Matt Wheeler m...@funkyhat.org:
2009/10/21 Luke Benstead kaz...@gmail.com:
You legend! Yeah, exactly that kind of thing, I think it would look pretty
cool.
Thanks a lot!
So, good idea?
Are you actually suggesting that messages that stay visible for longer
should bob up and
Johan Euphrosine wrote:
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 18:09 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
That would be worth a flash mockup, or code mockup, to see in
practice.
Hi,
Here is a tentative clutter mockup:
http://bitbucket.org/proppy/clutter-repl/raw/2f7b36efb1fe/logs/session13.ogv
Cody, this is an excellent post.
It's the best explanation of the project's reasoning, without the hard
edge. You will still get push back, but now you have a concise,
coherent argument that isn't quite so authoritarian. This really needs
to go in a FAQ.
Jim
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 13:36
Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
Johan Euphrosine wrote:
Here is better mockup:
http://bitbucket.org/proppy/clutter-repl/raw/4b8460e1e300/logs/session14.ogv
Let's hear what others think.
It feels odd to read from the bottom to the top. I played around with moving
things on the screen upwards and
On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 21:00 +0100, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
Can you get rid of the blank line between the lines of text, just to
tighten it up? And can you make it more real, like put a couple of
lines in there in one hit, then add a few others with random timing,
as if it were someone typing
2009/10/21 Martin Albisetti martin.albise...@canonical.com:
Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
Johan Euphrosine wrote:
Here is better mockup:
http://bitbucket.org/proppy/clutter-repl/raw/4b8460e1e300/logs/session14.ogv
Let's hear what others think.
It feels odd to read from the
Another interesting idea would be just to flip what we currently have so
that sync notifications are at the bottom right, and then async grow
vertically above them. This would make the async notifications more like it
IM window itself, where new text appears at the bottom and old text scrolls
up,
Brett Cornwall wrote:
Hello, I'm bringing attention to the mailing list that there's a fair
amount of displeasure at the newly designated spot for notify-osd. You
may read the entire bug report/thread here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/notify-osd/+bug/438536
In a nutshell,
...@ubuntu.com
Sent: Tue, October 20, 2009 3:03:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Ayatana] Regarding Notify-OSD's Position in Karmic Koala
That's where we settled for 9.10. For 10.04 I would like to revisit the
midpoint of the right hand side. I would not want to rehash old territory,
so please factor in the above
Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
The position is final for 9.10 but can certainly be reconsidered for
Lucid.
The factors that need to be considered are:
* fitting things into the corner is most aesthetically pleasing
* the synchronous notifications (like brightness and volume) are
fixed in size
33 matches
Mail list logo
