> On 16 Oct 2014, at 22:58, Torsten Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > Tudor wrote: >> Indeed. This was a discussion I wanted to spawn as well. I would prefer to >> change the name from Workspace to Playground in the World Menu. The reason >> is >that the Playground is such a distinct departure from the Workspace that >> it deserves a different name. > > I do not think it is a departure from the Workspace concept. > > Therefore I would keep "Workspace" for the menu item name and the window > name. It would be enough if the initial > tab is called "Playground" because one can play in the code pane (or do > serious stuff). > > This way we would keep up with a known concept (also from other IDE's), it > meets what people would expect and > no books would have to be rewritten ;) > > BTW: Squeak had a goodie with something similar back in the days (cant > remember the name). It was neat as one > could assemble different objects and different object representations in > one navigateable window. > > >>> I would suggest to use the well known order "Cut","Copy","Paste". >> Thanks for noticing. This will be fixed. > > Thanks! > >> Indeed, we had a debate about the name. I proposed the solution 3b you >> mention, but it was decided >> that it would be too confusing to change the Cmd+i action at this time, and >> we chose "Go" to be >> the name of the action that is mapped on Cmd+g. > > Here we agree - I would have choosen 3b as well. Decided by whom? Did I miss > the discussion in the > list or was it offlist?
basically, it was decided by me (and the course of the actions… I did not forced anyone :P). My reasons remain but I have to say: 1) Survey reflected a clear position towards what now is called 3b 2) We are still making tests… nothing is written in stone and we are looking for better ways to do things… so that can change again (and again, and again, and like that until we are happy) > >>> ...icons... >> This is a known issue and we will look at it soon. > > Sounds good. > >> At the moment, GT is an external project and the contributions should happen >> directly in its repository. > > Then please add me to the repo. Still the process is unclear - will I still > provide a slice with > issue number or will I change the config. > > It is not very lucky that this process was started (without > discussion/announcement/description first > and only for specific packages). > > Thx > T. >
