søn, 06 08 2006 kl. 15:43 -0400, skrev Robert Love: > On Sun, 2006-08-06 at 19:32 +0100, Alan Horkan wrote: > > > When it was introduced I pointed out that volume is very often associated > > with audio volume[1] and likely to confuse users - I freely admit it > > confused me intially - but since it made sense to developers my concerns > > were dismissed. > > The reason I was for g-v-m back then, but support the g-d-m (uh-oh, bad > acronym!) change now is because the scope of g-v-m has changed from just > volumes to all devices. G-v-m is now, in fact, our general policy > manager on top of HAL for all hardware. Toward that end, > gnome-hardware-manager makes sense, too.
Of the proposed names I would personally favor using the term hardware, it's much nicer for users as device has certain techie feel to it. Would there be any sense in merging g-v-m and the preferred application thingy, as a user they seem to serve pretty much the same kind of customization. Then again from there it's not a far cry from saying that the gstreamer setup application and g-p-m could also fit in there and voila we have a control panel - I'm not sure that's entirely desirable. Maybe rethinking where information is displayed would make sense, if we call g-v-m the hardware manager then for all intents and purposes things like the keyboard handler would go in there as well, it is hardware after all. As would the monitor settings and many other things. The whole preferences submenu has always seemed like a mess to me honestly, I would love to see it structured better. It has a feel of having had an item added everytime we got a new feature from somewhere rather than having followed the GNOME way and undergone some UI-fu for sanity and ease of use. - David Nielsen _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
