Re: Features !
2011/10/8 Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) : > Hi Mathias, > > On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:17 PM, Matthias Clasen > wrote: >> Hey, >> >> so according to the draft schedule that Andre posted a while ago, we >> are in the middle of the 'feature proposal' period right now. I >> haven't seen much feature discussion here at all yet, and so far, the >> wiki only lists things that I have put there, which is a little scary >> - I can't be the only one itching to get cool things into GNOME 3.4. >> >> Where are your ideas ? It would be great to get them onto that wiki >> page, in particular since next weekend a bunch of us will get together >> in Montreal to, among other things, spend time to talk about 3.4 >> features. > > Was wondering if we could take-up this forgotten feature planned for > 3.1: https://live.gnome.org/ThreePointOne/Features/Sharing > > AFAIK, the issue was that designers were way too busy with more > important features in 3.1 so they didn't get any time for this one. > Lapo has started to investigate this it seems and last I asked > Bastien, he was also interested(?) in getting this done in 3.3 cycle. I'm interested in networking and sharing is one of the variables of the equation. I'll be happy to work on the design part as soon as the network panel design is done. Sharing means a lot of things btw, so we need a plan at least. > Regards, > > Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) > FSF member#5124 > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: On the Interaction with the design team
2011/6/7 Frederic Crozat : [SNIP] > My point is that GNOME OS is clearly driven by design (team), at least > for people like me who are trying to get a overview of what is going > on there.. If it isn't designed driven (which seems to contradict our > new moto "we design and select features first"), then it is even more > problematic. > There is no design team as a whole, there are designers. Speaking for myself I don't really know or care atm about gnome os, I do care about functionalities offered by gnome tho. >>> As somebody who has been active for years as a GNOME "packager", it is >>> becoming impossible to monitor what design changes are coming and >>> bring feedback based on my experience from interacting with users. >> >> You'll need to be more specific. You want to be able to participate in >> design work? How did you do this monitoring and feedback previously? > > I want to be able to give feedback at any level (including design). In > the past, monitoring mailing lists (including usability, > desktop-devel) and planet gnome was enough. > You usually hang on our channel, your feedback is appreciated, reading the scrollback is not very different then followind discussions on the mailing lists, anyway we need to improve in this field. Different != Impossible tho > -- > Frederic Crozat > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: On the Interaction with the design team
2011/6/7 Matthew Paul Thomas : > Lapo Calamandrei wrote on 06/06/11 17:20: >>... >> 2011/6/6 Dave Neary : >>... >>> I feel that the current operation of the design team is hurting our >>> relationship with Canonical, who also have designers who have, I >>> believe, failed to influence design discussions in the same measure as >>> the "core" members of the design team like Lapo, Allan, Jon. > > However good or bad Gnome's design processes are, I don't think those > processes have anything to do with the relationship with Canonical. The > reason Canonical designers have not influenced Gnome design discussions > is that we are not instructed to take part, and most of us haven't even > heard of #gnome-design. (To be clear, nobody's telling us *not* to take > part, it's just not part of our jobs.) > > That may be a good thing or a bad thing. I can certainly see drawbacks: > for example, I have lost count of the number of times one of my > colleagues has sketched something that assumes the existence of > gnome-about-me, and I've had to say "uh, that doesn't exist any more". > Or when they've talked about having a unified settings panel for online > accounts, oblivious to the Web Accounts panel being designed and > implemented upstream as they speak. That's the downfall of not working in close contact with upstream, or you stick with a certain version of the software or you'll aim a moving target. Even with everything documented or with some magic tool to track what we're doing this won't be solved, the only way is to design stuff diretcly upstream and influencing design decisions. > >>> I think >>> the lack of documentation of the core design team makes it harder for >>> new designers to get involved. > > I do agree with this. For most of the Gnome designs I come across, I > think: What stage is this at? Is this supposed to be a draft, or the > final design? What alternatives have been considered so far? What > benefits and disadvantages have been predicted in each? Have any of the > predictions been tested with users? How could I most productively > suggest another alternative? Getting answers to those questions > shouldn't require waiting for the right person to turn up on IRC. > We can certanly improove things in this area, but we're usually very busy and we have no tools to do it. If I want to give feedback to some design I see on our repositories I just leave a note there if the right person is not online. Yeah it's not the best way possible, but there are ways to do it, if you want to. >>> To sum it all up, I believe the current >>> dynamic of the design team is doing damage to GNOME as a community. >> >> Would you elaborate this? Adding some facts please? > > For example, I think a lot of the discontent with Gnome Shell could be > calmed if the wireframes of alternatives that were considered were > published, and if user testing results were published too. There's planty of stuff around regarding Shell design, it just not nicelly structured, but both the wiki and our repos are full of material, old stuff included, anyway not my domain so I'll just pass here. > >> Unfortunatelly IRC is the only tool which work fo us atm (since google >> pulled wave which was nice), we're very open and responsive on the >> channel, I listen to every suggestion I get and answer any question, >> just hang on the channel and see. > > An XMPP chat room (as used for Inkscape developer discussion, for > example) has the relevant advantage that history can be easily available > even to people who weren't in the room at the time. The same is true for irc with a log bot or something like that. > >> Also the repositories we are using >> are open and everybody can participate. > > Requiring designers to learn git limits the number and type of designers. We actually don't require that, sparkleshare does all the magic. We just ned to grant write access to people. > >> I respect and esteem Matthew >> Paul Thomas which is the only canonical designer I ever interacted >> with on the channel and I think I have zero issues with him, while I'd >> like to see him more activelly involved. >>... > > Thank you. The main reason I'm not more actively involved is that when I > get home from work I try to focus on things that aren't software. Fair enough, you should use your work time then :-) > > -- > mpt > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: On the Interaction with the design team
Hi Dave, 2011/6/6 Dave Neary : > Hi, > > Emmanuele Bassi wrote: >> can you please explain to me, in a short sentence, what do you want to >> achieve? not how, but precisely what. > > I have said that already: I want to enable the design team to work > productively with the entire GNOME development community. > > Right now a small number of designers are working effectively with a > small number of developers, and I've observed increasing discontent > among developers not on the inside. > >> Dave, Johannes: do you want to participate in the design decisions? > > No - I think that designers should be making design decisions, after > collaborating with the developers affected. > >> do you want some history and/or accountability? > > Yes. But this is a side-effect, rather than a primary goal. > >> do you have *specific* issues related to you (sorry, no "the community >> might feel" or "there have been rumors" or "people can misunderstand")? > > Yes. *I* was annoyed by the recent Deja Dup discussion, and felt that > the developer got short-changed at the end of the day. I was very > annoyed at the "systemd as external dependency" discussion, and the > message that some people following along the "GNOME OS" meme sent to > developers on other platforms. I feel that the current operation of the > design team is hurting our relationship with Canonical, who also have > designers who have, I believe, failed to influence design discussions in > the same measure as the "core" members of the design team like Lapo, > Allan, Jon. I think the lack of documentation of the core design team > makes it harder for new designers to get involved. To sum it all up, I > believe the current dynamic of the design team is doing damage to GNOME > as a community. > Would you elaborate this? Adding some facts please? Unfortunatelly IRC is the only tool which work fo us atm (since google pulled wave which was nice), we're very open and responsive on the channel, I listen to every suggestion I get and answer any question, just hang on the channel and see. Also the repositories we are using are open and everybody can participate. I respect and esteem Matthew Paul Thomas which is the only canonical designer I ever interacted with on the channel and I think I have zero issues with him, while I'd like to see him more activelly involved. If the canonical designers feel being pushed away in the design process they should just voice their opinions on the channel as everybody else does, their opinions and suggestion would be appreciated. Anyway the canonical guys are on our channel all the time, why do I learn from you we are hurting the relationship with canonical? [SNIP] ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Removing old icons from gnome-desktop
2010/8/7 Vincent Untz : > Hi, > > For years, gnome-desktop has shipped with old icons that get installed > in /usr/share/pixmaps. See > http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-desktop/tree/pixmaps > > Unless somebody shouts loud in the next few days, I'll remove those > icons from master (ie, gnome-desktop that is targetted at 3.0). > > Cheers, > > Vincent > > -- > Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > Please axe them all, loud shouters should feel free to fill icon requests bugs to gnome-icon-theme and we'll try to deal with them in best way possible. Cheers Lapo ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: New clock applet for 2.22
Nice stuff, it may need some graphic love tho, any particular reason why the clock graphics are 50x50 and 36x36? It would be better to have them 48x48 and 32x32 as our icons. 2007/9/24, Matthias Clasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Since everybody is making proposals for 2.22, here is my contribution: > we should merge the clock applet with the intlclock that Novell has written. > > David and I have done some further work on it to support timezone > setting and weather information, the current status of which you can > see here: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureClockApplet > > This is using new technologies that have appeared lower in the stack, > like DBus system bus activation and PolicyKit, and can serve as good > example for how to integrate these into the desktop. > > We want to do some more work on it in the Gnome 2.22/Fedora 9 > timeframe, as is explained on the wiki page. > > Matthias > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list > ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
