> > It also seems like we're trying to hide the real program name and > > would be a bit > > insulting to the communities who work on producing them. > > Well, to be fair, this is what the community version of GNOME does > too, and has done for years, so we're not doing anything they don't > approve of. > > (The original community plan was that core GNOME apps really would be > called "Text Editor" rather than "gedit", for example, but some > maintainers understandably got a bit stroppy about that, so the > compromise was to use generic names on the menus for core apps, and > keep the application name in the application itself, although > preferably just in its About box.)
That's interesting. Any idea why the community wanted to do that? > >> - Is there a dire need to have network status on the panel? It's > >> blinking bothers me and some other folks I've talked to. :-( > > > > It's also redundant and counter-productive in some environments - > > if you can > > see anything at all on your Sun Ray, your network must be working > > and flashing > > it is just increasing the network bandwidth usage, causing it to > > flash even > > more. > > I'm happy to remove it. Incidentally though, the 2.14 version does > blink a /lot/ less noticeably than the JDS3 version, you really have > to look at it now to check whether it's doing anything or not. I'd be curious to see what it looks like now... yet, I'm still biased against it showing. A static image showing "alive" and "dead" seem like it would be sufficient? (at the same time, I suppose in this day and age where so much of one's life involves interacting with the network, one is probably more likely to notice the network is down because one's browser or mail client doesn't work. So, maybe I should ask before suggesting the thing should or shouldn't be removed: what problem is it solving? david david
