Re: Canonical jhbuild documentation

Frederic Peters wrote: ... > I believe this is no longer a problem; when I tried to merge the > by-then new "BuildGnome" page into the manual, and converting it to > Mallard, the primary problem was of license incompatibility between > the contents from the wiki and the existing manual. > > It wou

Re: Canonical jhbuild documentation

Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: ... >> Seems like you should talk this through with Carlos and Ryan - they're >> the effective maintainers of the wiki pages in question. I know that >> Carlos is keen to reduce the amount of duplication. > > Yes, I sent this email after consulting with him and Fred. I as

Re: Canonical jhbuild documentation

Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: ... > I think though, as someone else further in the thread said, we want to > make a distinction between 'quick start' and the manual. I honestly don't see why the manual can't contain a quick start section - we do this in other documentation without issue. Again: the m

Re: 3.16 Release Notes

The release notes wiki page is still missing a lot of detail. Please take a minute to check it over - we'll be starting to write them up soon. Thanks, Allan On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Allan Day wrote: > Hi all, > > The wiki page for the 3.16 release notes is now up [1], so p

Re: Canonical jhbuild documentation

Carlos Soriano Sanchez wrote: ... > When I created the series of BuildGnome & CodeContributionWorkflow my > intention was creating a simple straightforward workflow > for contributing to Gnome for newcommers to Gnome and/or FOSS. So the simpler > the better. ... > BuildGnome it is not a generic

Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org

Carlos Soriano Sanchez wrote: ... > So after some work in GnomeLove and discussions in the gnome-love list, I > would like to make this proposal. > Read more here https://wiki.gnome.org/CarlosSoriano/GnomeLoveMoveTask > > So I would want to have feedback on this idea over this week, since I will

Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org

Magdalen Berns wrote: ... >> New jhbuild/git/whatever tutorials will came up... people won't find the >> appropriate one given that the wiki >> is not official. > > Echo this. The developer.gnome jhbuild instructions are quite misleading > because they are not up to date. Yet, this is where newcom

Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org

, Carlos Soriano Sanchez wrote: > So if we continue with the wiki, most of the points I pointed before continue > to be a problem... > > New jhbuild/git/whatever tutorials will came up... I'm not sure why this is an issue... it is perfectly acceptable for you to manage the GnomeLove area of the

Re: Proposal to make GnomeLove official and move it to developer.gnome.org

Carlos Soriano Sanchez wrote: ... > I understand what you mean with removing "community maintained", but can be > misleading for others. Let me explain: > developer.gnome.org is still maintained by the community, but they go through > a review process, and gives control to the maintainers. > Lik

Re: GNOME HIG: Feedback Wanted

Alexandre Franke wrote: ... > https://developer.gnome.org/hig/stable/writing-style.html.en has > nothing on error messages. Can we have guidelines on what is preferred > between "Cannot…", "Could not…", "Failed to…", etc. for a bit more > consistency? Sure thing - can you file a bug for that? I'm

Reminder: Board of Directors candidacy period ends on 18th May

Hi all, In case you missed it, the candidacy period for the Board of Directors elections ends on Monday 18th May. This is the final date on which you can announce your intention to run for the board. Full details can be found in Andrea's original announcement: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/fou

Release Notes Time!

Yes, it's that time already: 3.18 is starting to loom, and we need to collect information on the great work that everyone has done over the last 6 months. If you've worked on anything user (or developer) facing, we need to hear about it. Don't worry about whether the change is too small to mention

Re: Release Notes Time!

I know that you have more to tell me about. Don't be shy! Allan On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 5:20 PM, Allan Day wrote: > Yes, it's that time already: 3.18 is starting to loom, and we need to > collect information on the great work that everyone has done over the > last 6 months. &

Re: Release Notes Time!

Magdalen Berns wrote: >> > You know what to do. > > Lies! Should I write something about java-atk-wrapper or is it just the core > module maintainers you're wanting to hear from about this? :D You had to prove me wrong, didn't you?! Anyone can add to the wiki page. Just be sure to include detail

New GNOME goal: shortcuts windows

Hi all, GTK+ now has these really cool shortcut windows, which allow you to show a dialog with an overview of all the keyboard shortcuts and gestures in an app. It would be awesome if we could get as many apps using these as possible by 3.20, so I've created a GNOME Goal for it: https://wiki.gnom

Re: GNOME Music needs you!

Felipe Borges wrote: ... > Music is one of those core applications that we all love. It follows a > design-oriented approach, and it's written on Python. > > Music has been a little abandoned since the last release, and it still > lacks some important features. Therefore, I hereby invite you all,

Re: Status Query: file-roller

Ikey Doherty wrote: ... > If there are some mockups we can work from, it's something we can > put some time into on our end :) Don't wanna see something we use > so much go to waste. It might be better to obsolete File Roller altogether and have archives automatically handled by Nautilus. There's

Re: New GNOME goal: shortcuts windows

I've just updated the guidelines for this goal: please check them out if your app has a shortcuts window. There might be one or two small changes that need to be made. Thanks, Allan On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 5:08 PM, Allan Day wrote: > Hi all, > > GTK+ now has these really cool sh

Re: Hijri calendar

Michael Catanzaro wrote: ... >> There is an addon for this: >> https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/240/persian-calendar/ > > That's a cool extension. But ideally, the built-in calendar would > display in an appropriate format for the current locale. I bet the > developers would be receptive if

Re: GNOME Music needs you!

Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: ... >> Music suffers more from rough edges than lack of features, in my >> opinion. It would benefit greatly from a new maintainer, particularly >> if they could review what we already have. > > So, follow up - what needs to be done right now? I assume we want to start >

Re: New GNOME goal: shortcuts windows

Hi everyone! A little update on how this goal is going! 14 apps have been given shortcut windows so far. These are: Boxes Builder Clocks Documents Eye of GNOME Evince Files gedit Logs Maps Photos Polari Settings Videos That's pretty good progress! In terms of outstanding work, I count around 8 a

3.20 Test Days

For this cycle, I wanted to make sure that we do a more thorough job of testing prior to release. To that end, I've scheduled three days where I plan to do testing. The idea is to do a simple walk through of the release, as a new user would experience it, making notes and taking screenshots along

Remembering Thomas Wood

Hi everyone, As some of you might have heard, Thomas Wood passed away last month. This is extremely sad news for those of us who knew him: he was a great guy, who was always supportive of the GNOME project. There's a short post about Thomas on gnome.org: https://www.gnome.org/news/2016/02/rememb

Re: 3.20 Test Days

n Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 1:02 PM Allan Day wrote: > For this cycle, I wanted to make sure that we do a more thorough job of > testing prior to release. To that end, I've scheduled three days where I > plan to do testing. > > The idea is to do a simple walk through of the relea

Release notes time!

Hi everyone! The 3.19.x cycle is drawing to a close. With the UI freeze behind us, it is time to think about all the cool stuff that will be released with 3.20. So, please spend a minute to add any user or developer facing changes to the wiki page: https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointNineteen/Releas

Re: 3.20 Test Days

Hello! The third and final test day of the 3.19.x series is scheduled for next Monday, March 7. The test days have been really useful, but we do need more volunteers to help out. Instructions on how to conduct the tests are provided on the wiki [1], and there is a page set up for collecting resul

Re: Release notes time!

We are starting to write the release notes now, so please add any changes to the wiki if you haven't already! Allan On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Allan Day wrote: > Hi everyone! > > The 3.19.x cycle is drawing to a close. With the UI freeze behind us, it is > time to think a

Re: GNOME Photos plans for 3.22

On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 5:12 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: ... >> * Import from device: Importing images from cameras, SD cards and >> USB sticks [3]. >> >> This is another thing that has, so far, been missing from the >> content applications, and I think it is a crucial feature when >> dealing

Release Notes for GNOME 3.22

Hi everyone! 3.22 is getting scarily close, so it's time to start thinking about the release notes. If you have worked on any user or developer visible changes that will be included in the release, please list them on the wiki page: https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentyone/ReleaseNotes Don't

Re: Maybe deprecating libgweather

Giovanni Campagna wrote: ... > Any comments / opinions? > The dropdown list of search results that libgweather provides isn't great, so +1 from me. Allan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/

Re: Maybe deprecating libgweather

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > > The dropdown list of search results that libgweather provides isn't > > great, so +1 from me. ... > This could be provided by geocode-glib though, meaning we could stop > relying on a weather library to provide locations. And we'l

3.22 Release Notes: Final Call!

Hi all, We'll be freezing the 3.22 release notes in the next day or two, so if you have anything that should be added to them, now's the time. Just add the details to: https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentyone/ReleaseNotes Thanks, Allan ___ desktop-

UX features for 3.24

Hi everyone! Below is a list of UX features that would be great to have from a design point of view. I thought I'd share it, in case it helps with 3.24 planning. It's not a complete list and I think that some of them are already being worked on. It would be really great to have a bunch of these r

Re: UX features for 3.24

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Hugo Alejandro wrote: > Hi, using that thread I have a doubt related with the 751212 bug and which > can be resolved from the perspective of design. How handles gnome-photos > importing videos from cameras? > > I mean that other similar software as Gthumb, import

Re: Thoughs about communication

Alberto Fanjul Alonso wrote: ... > Do anybody though about trying new services for communication? > > - signal https://whispersystems.org/ > - telegram https://telegram.org/ > - matrix.org http://matrix.org/ > - gitter https://gitter.im/ > - Rocket.Chat https://rocket.chat/ - Mattermost https

Re: Thoughs about communication

I agree with pretty much everything you've written here, Emmanuele. Just one comment... On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 1:32 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: ... > >> pros/cons irc: > >> > >> pros: > >> > >> - is widespread > >> - integrated in gnome environment (bots, bugzilla) > > > > I would argue these t

Re: Thoughs about communication

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:56 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: ... > My two cents, and bear with me on my slight rant - I really hate the idea > of depending on a web app like riot. It's like admitting that we've lost > the whole application space and that we're going browser. I know that is > not w

Release notes for 3.24 are open!

Hi everyone, UI freeze is just under two weeks away, so now's a good time to think about what we want to put in the release notes for 3.24. If you know about anything that might be interesting to users or developers, please add it to the wiki page: https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentythree/Rel

Re: GNOME goal candidates

oals/HeaderBars (Allan Day) > ... I don't think this one is particularly needed any more. Allan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: irc.gimp.org is now available via Matrix (was: Re: Thoughs about communication)

Carlos Soriano via desktop-devel-list wrote: ... > On thing I was a little afraid yesterday is that my devices are shown for > everybody (and then it says validate the key), at some point I though those > were private keys rather than public to ensure the sender/receiver. > ... I've started a wi

Final call for the 3.24 release notes!

Hi all, I'm currently writing up the release notes for 3.24, and would like to have the text finalised next week. If you know of anything that should be included, now's the time to add it to the wiki: https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentythree/ReleaseNotes We particularly need details for the

Re: Final call for the 3.24 release notes!

wrote: ... > I'm currently writing up the release notes for 3.24, and would like to >> have the text finalised next week. If you know of anything that should be >> included, now's the time to add it to the wiki: >> >> https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentythree/ReleaseNotes >> >> We particularly

Re: GNOME Logo Licensing

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > That was what I would have said, if Simon didn't put it so eloquently. > So +1 for a permissive license for the artwork itself, we can control > its usage through the GNOME trademark. > Thanks for the contributions so far. The main t

3.26 Feature Planning

Hi everyone, If any of you are planning features for the next GNOME release, feel free to add them to the list on the wiki: https://wiki.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning/FeaturePlans This is mostly for downstreams and partners, so they can get advance notice of what's being worked on. It doesn't do any

Re: Paperwork : a personal document manager (scanned and PDFs)

Hey Jerome! Great to hear from you, and welcome to the GNOME project! Jerome Flesch wrote: ... > (sorry if it's not the correct mailing-list for this kind of discussions) > > On Github, someone told me that there is someone else in the Gnome > design team working on mockups for a new document m

Re: Mycroft GNOME Shell Extension & Request to join the community

Hey Rahul! Rahul Mehra wrote: ... > I recently released the Mycroft AI Gnome Shell Extension for the Gnome > Shell Desktop Environment. The shell extension is a front end to > Mycroft AI which can be described as an open source digital assistant > for the Linux platform. The gnome shell extensio

Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

have complete knowledge and we would like to hear questions and comments. At the same time, we do ask that members of the community approach this proposal with an open mind: please read the wiki pages and try to resist making assumptions about GitLab without familiarising yourself with it. Yours, Alla

Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

Alexandre Franke wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Allan Day wrote: > > In recent months we have got together to examine the possibilities for > > GNOME’s development infrastructure. We’ve spent a lot of time on this, > > because we want the community to have fai

Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Shaun McCance wrote: > On Tue, 2017-05-16 at 14:22 +0100, Allan Day wrote: > > The outcome of this evaluation process is that we are recommending > > that GNOME sets up its own GitLab instance, as a replacement for > > Bugzilla and cgit. &g

Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 5:36 PM, wrote: ... > We need a much better migration plan than that. If we don't have a script > to migrate Bugzilla issues, comments, and attachments to our new GitLab > instance, then we should not be considering using GitLab's issue tracker at > all. > We're committed

GNOME 3.26 release notes

Hi everyone, UI freeze is upon us, so now's a good time to think about release notes! Please provide information about any user or developer changes that have been made this development cycle, by adding them to the wiki page: https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentyfive/ReleaseNotes Don't worry a

Re: Updating GNOME Goals?

I have a list of about 12 apps that don't have search providers and probably should. I'd love for us to make some progress on that - would it make a good goal? Allan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/

Re: Updating GNOME Goals?

Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > > I have a list of about 12 apps that don't have search providers and > > probably should. I'd love for us to make some progress on that - > > would it make a good goal? > > Let's fix the search providers infrastructure first. They're unusable > on slow machines, and s

Re: Application name strings consistency

Michael Catanzaro wrote: ... > * Maps appears as GNOME Maps in Software, Maps in about dialog >> * Clocks appears as GNOME Clocks in Software, Clocks in about dialog >> * Music appears as GNOME Music in Software, Music in about dialog >> * Software appears as GNOME Software in Software, Software

Re: Application name strings consistency

Alexandre Franke wrote: ... > > 1. App names should be consistent. > > 2. We generally don't expect users to know what GNOME is. > > 3. There are other, better, places we can advertise the project, if > that's > > what we want to do. > > That’s for the name used in GNOME Software though, which is

Re: Application name strings consistency

Matthias Clasen wrote: ... > But names also need to sufficiently identify the named item. Ending up > with 5 "Clocks" and 4 "Maps" in gnome-software isn't really the best user > experience. > ... I don't see that issue. Allan ___ desktop-devel-list ma

Re: Application name strings consistency

Richard Hughes wrote: ... > >> But names also need to sufficiently identify the named item. Ending up > >> with 5 "Clocks" and 4 "Maps" in gnome-software isn't really the best user > >> experience. ... > > I don't see that issue. ... > That's because I blacklist all the MATE and LXDE programs when

Re: Application name strings consistency

Jeremy Bicha wrote: >>The other thing we can do in Software is think >> about making the developer more prominent. > > Like using "GNOME Files" in GNOME Software as was suggested by > everyone in this thread who expressed a preference? I'm thinking more of what you often see in other software sto

Re: Application name strings consistency

Hi all, Having spent some time studying this issue, I think it's best to keep the app names stable and improve how we provide more detailed information about each app (particularly the program name and developer). I've written up my research and a set of proposals on the wiki page I mentioned prev

Re: Proposal for reducing the number of unremovable apps in GNOME Software

Matthias Clasen wrote: ... > I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable. > On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anything that's not a flatpak would be part of the image, and therefore unremovable? I've been looking at this issue recently from a slightly different

Re: Proposal for reducing the number of unremovable apps in GNOME Software

Emmanuele Bassi wrote: ... > > This does not mean that gnome-screenshot should be made unremovable, > but it definitely needs some additional thought. > Documentation is another factor to consider. Currently, if you look up how to take a screenshot, the docs tell you to use the screenshot app [1]

Re: Proposal for reducing the number of unremovable apps in GNOME Software

Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > > > I don't see the relation between sandboxable and unremovable. > > > > > > > On an image-based OS, wouldn't it be the case that anything that's > > not a flatpak would be part of the image, and therefore unremovable? > > I've been looking at this issue recently from

Re: Proposal for reducing the number of unremovable apps in GNOME Software

Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > I don't think that applications such as Calendar, Contacts, or finding > and reminding apps should be removed from the requirements for a well- > rounded, default desktop. How they're installed is a technical question > that's not relevant to the fact that they're need

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

Emmanuele Bassi wrote: ... > And, yes: diversity is still an issue that we need to tackle [insert > subtle reminder here about the code of conduct rework that the board > is still working on and that I hope I'll see in my lifetime]. ... Small clarification - it's the working group [1] that's work

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

Emmanuele Bassi wrote: ... > This raises the question of who is going to review the currently > insufficient-bordering-on-useless code of conduct that we have for > GNOME online services and, more generally, for the community? ... As you know, I'm also on the Foundation Board of Directors. I'd li

Please add items to the 3.28 release notes page

Hi everyone, The Engagement Team is starting the release notes process a little early for 3.28. This is partly to support the release videos that Bastian Ilso does, which require information about the release and have a long lead time. So, if you know about any features that are going to be in 3.

3.28 Release Notes

Hi everyone, The Engagement Team is about to start work on the release notes for 3.28. If you know of any changes that ought to be mentioned, please add them to the wiki page: https://wiki.gnome.org/ThreePointTwentyseven/ReleaseNotes If you are in any doubt about whether to mention a change or f

Re: Documentation - language default

Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: > Some of you may be aware that we have started a documentation effort in > order to give application developers a proper set of documentation for them > to write applications. I'm not aware of this. Can you provide some more information? (Who's involved, what the scope i

Re: Documentation - language default

Emmanuele Bassi wrote:>: ... > This was the conclusion of the 2013 DX hackfest: > > https://treitter.livejournal.com/14871.html ... > - the announcement was made without resourcing, in the *hope* somebody > would turn up I don't think that's entirely true - my recollection is that there were s

Re: Documentation - language default

Michael Hall wrote: ... >> Some of these are within reach, although as Bastian pointed out, >> having the necessary infrastructure has been a stumbling block in the >> past. > > We've settled on Who is "we"? Where is the planning and discussion happening for this? > using Django CMS and are work

Re: Documentation - language default

Michael Hall wrote: ... > We have a project > on GNOME's Gitlab, a Telegram channel, and have been trying to hold regular > meetings on it. This is all news to me... it would have been good to have heard about the initiative sooner - I've been involved in quite a few discussions about GNOME's dev

Re: Documentation - language default

Michael Hall wrote: ... >> I've been involved in quite a few discussions >> about GNOME's developer documentation over the years, and have done a >> fair amount of work on developer documentation design in the past [1] >> (this came out of a meeting we had at GUADEC in 2016), including >> creating

Re: Documentation - language default

Michael Hall wrote: ... > Is the design for the site used on > https://people.collabora.com/~meh/gdd/index.html#getstarted still valid? As valid as it ever was... It was primarily meant as a proof of concept, particularly in terms of whether we could produce a decent site with only a limited amou

GNOME Goal proposal: app menu retirement

Hi everyone, We've been talking for a while about removing app menus, and the designs have now matured to the point where we can propose a concrete plan. Specifics can be found on the GNOME goal page: https://wiki.gnome.org/Initiatives/GnomeGoals/AppMenuRetirement Those of us on the design side

Re: GNOME Goal proposal: app menu retirement

Milan Crha via desktop-devel-list wrote: ... > this seems to be aimed to applications which use header bar in the > title bar. I suppose this doesn't cover the applications which do not > use anything like that, does it? I've added a few notes about what to do if your application has a menu bar.

No app menu changes for GNOME 3.30, please!

Hi everyone, I've noticed some apps have started removing their app menus, or copying their app menu items elsewhere. Please, don't make any changes to your menus yet! Unless we have a mass migration over a single cycle, we'll end up with a complete mess. The plan that I previously sent to this l

Re: No app menu changes for GNOME 3.30, please!

Isaque Galdino wrote: > > Humm, from [1], I understood we could start the migration. > "Summer 2018 > (...) > Apps can start migrating during the 3.30 cycle > Fall 2018 > (...) > 3.30 ships with app menu support in the shell, but most apps don't use it > anymore " I know that's what Tobi

Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

Hi all, As previously discussed, we're planning to retire app menus this development cycle. The aim is to remove all application menus by 3.32.0. I've written some updated guidelines for the initiative , and I'd appreciate it i

Re: Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

Adrien Plazas wrote: ... > What about updating the name ofthe "Keyboard Shortcuts" entry? The windows they trigger also contain gestures and in Games they also contain gamepad controls, making them being about way more than keyboards. > > "Shortcuts" is a simple replacement but any other idea is w

Re: Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

Alexandre Franke wrote: > Allan Day wrote: > > To be honest, I'm not sure how successful the keyboard shortcut windows > > have been and I suspect that they're not being used a great deal. > > What are you basing this on? Anecdotal evidence, primarily -

Re: Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > ... The keyboard shortcuts dialogue in Videos is invaluable. > > Its contents used to be in the README file, which users wouldn't see, > the user documentation still shows the old interface (from 4 years > ago), and I'd rather not rely on user docs if I can help it. Pu

Re: Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

Nathan Graule wrote: ... > I feel like having the primary menu hidden in an in-window navigation app > would be a regression from current, as a primary menu may apply anywhere, and > having the user modify (and especially here, undo) application state in order > to access a particular menu item

Re: Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > > Putting aside the issue of outdated user docs, > > Well, it's a pretty big factor here. Can't we just remove out of date user docs? I realise that my line of reasoning is somewhat hypothetical here, but if there are issues with the user docs, we ought to fix them.

Re: Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

On Fri, 21 Sep 2018 at 12:54, wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2018 at 5:36 AM, Bastien Nocera > wrote: > > It's faster to access for users, has terser explanations (no need to > > create sentences to describe actions) and it's usually better updated > > as it lives in the code, as opposed to being sep

Re: Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

Florian Müllner wrote: > > With regard to dropping the 'quit' action, is there any guidance for > background applications? That is, apps where closing all windows does > *not* exit the application, but the explicit 'quit' action does. Sorry for the slow reply - it's been a busy week. This questi

Re: Retiring app menus - planning for 3.32.0

Allan Day wrote: ... > > With regard to dropping the 'quit' action, is there any guidance for > > background applications? That is, apps where closing all windows does > > *not* exit the application, but the explicit 'quit' action does. ... GIven that thi

Retiring app menus - happening now!

Hi all, Thanks to everyone who contributed to the previous thread on this subject. I've now started filing issues against individual modules. This is being tracked here: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/Initiatives/issues/4#affected-projects There are a lot of modules to cover, so help would be ap

App menu retirement: progress update

Hi everyone, Hopefully everyone should be aware of the ongoing initiative to retire application menus . It's almost a month since I announced the initiative, so I wanted to provide a progress update. The headline is that 23 out of 62 apps have

Re: App menu retirement: progress update

Alberto Fanjul Alonso wrote: > > gitg has issue filed at least https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gitg/issues/141 Thanks Alberto and Jan, I've added these issues to the tracker. Allan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https:/

Re: App menu retirement: progress update

On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 at 11:37, Richard Hughes wrote: > > On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 17:09, Allan Day wrote: > > gnome-multi-writer > > Removed in master. Thanks Richard! To make sure, in Multiwriter's case there should be a primary menu with the following items: Import ISO

Help wanted with the shell's top bar

Hi all, Back in 3.26 we introduced semi-transparency to the shell's top bar. On the design side we were never all that happy with where the UI landed and have wanted to improve it since then. However, we've been unable to make any progress. We don't want to have another release with the current t

Re: GitLab postmortem

Hey Carlos, The GitLab transition has been really positive from a design perspective. I would definitely say that our work feels easier and more productive than it was. I think that GitLab is also helping us to maintain a healthy design team. Some highlights: - It's allowed us to migrate all ou

Re: Annual GNOME Bugzilla statistics for 2018 (One last time)

Andre Klapper wrote: ... > one last quick look at some basic GNOME Bugzilla activity in 2018. It's the end of an era! Thanks Andre. Allan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-d

App menu retirement: outstanding MRs

Hi all, With a little over three weeks until UI freeze, I wanted to share a summary of the outstanding tasks for the app menu retirement initiative [1]. Every one of the target apps now has an MR to retire the app menu (great work everyone!) The challenge now is to get them all merged in time. Th

Re: App menu retirement: outstanding MRs

Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > The Videos change would also require a great deal of work I thought it was just shuffling some menu items around...? > with no > definite target design actually selected. I tried to be explicit in the issue. Is anything unclear? I could draw a mockup if that would he

Re: App menu retirement: outstanding MRs

Jeremy Bicha wrote: ... > > > The Videos change would also require a great deal of work > > I thought it was just shuffling some menu items around...? > > My merge request was incomplete. It didn't handle the Python console > menu for instance. I submitted it anyway in case it would help someone >

Re: GNOME Online Accounts 3.34 won't have documents support

Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > > We are currently in the 3.31.x / 3.32 development cycle. Once the > > GNOME 3.32 release is done, starting from 3.33.1, I will be removing > > the GNOME Documents specific integration points from GNOME Online > > Accounts because we no longer encourage distributors to

Re: GNOME Online Accounts 3.34 won't have documents support

Christopher Davis wrote: ... > As the new maintaner I would be against making Documents a Google Drive > client, or at least > a Drive-specific one. I was just raising further Google Drive integration as one possible direction to explore - I'm not specifically pushing for it. (My recollection is

Re: GNOME Online Accounts 3.34 won't have documents support

Emmanuele Bassi via desktop-devel-list wrote: ... >> We have a rule though: the account types exposed in >> gnome-online-accounts must be used by at least one core application. >> It's a good rule because it doesn't make sense to have settings in >> control-center for apps that aren't installed by

Re: GNOME Online Accounts 3.34 won't have documents support

Bastien Nocera wrote: ... > Removing GNOME Documents from the release is fine. The problem is that > as it is removed from the release, it's an excuse for GNOME Online > Accounts to remove the "Documents" category. My perspective: it's not great for our users if we have a Documents switch in the

<    1   2   3   4   >