Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-07 Thread Simon Schampijer
On 12/06/2009 10:20 PM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: 2009/12/3 Aleksey Limalsr...@member.fsf.org: On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Eben Eliason wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Wade

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-06 Thread Tomeu Vizoso
2009/12/3 Aleksey Lim alsr...@member.fsf.org: On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Eben Eliason wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com wrote: When deleting an object from

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-05 Thread Simon Schampijer
Hi Aleksey others, just a quick note on the Feature process. This feature does not change or add new UI but is a huge change on the workflow. In these cases you should add the [DESIGN] flag, too. While thinking about it, I guess we nearly need design team feedback on all Features... ;) Eben

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-05 Thread Simon Schampijer
On 11/30/2009 08:54 PM, Daniel Drake wrote: 2009/11/30 Walter Benderwalter.ben...@gmail.com: This isn't quite accurate. We've been adding some pre-loaded content to the Journal for quite some time now, Are you sure? Or are you referring to a manual process that you do in certain deployments?

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-05 Thread Simon Schampijer
On 12/03/2009 06:23 AM, Eben Eliason wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Wade Brainerdwad...@gmail.com wrote: When deleting an object from the Journal that is an activity bundle, we ought to display an

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-05 Thread Simon Schampijer
On 12/03/2009 06:37 AM, Aleksey Lim wrote: On a more general note, this discussion has many hints of the action/object views that have been tossed around for some time now. This specifically addressed the conflict between the desire to manage all objects and the desire to have the Journal

[Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-05 Thread Aleksey Lim
Hi all, This post is not about particular feature but about proposed to 0.88 features that can be composited to one set. Some of them could be implemented in 0.88 partially, some are invasive, some not. We lost possibility to push several such features in 0.86 and we have a chance to do it once

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-02 Thread Eben Eliason
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com wrote: When deleting an object from the Journal that is an activity bundle, we ought to display an alert with a scary icon.  The alert should clearly

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-02 Thread Aleksey Lim
On Thu, Dec 03, 2009 at 12:23:37AM -0500, Eben Eliason wrote: On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Martin Langhoff martin.langh...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com wrote: When deleting an object from the Journal that is an activity bundle, we

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-12-01 Thread Martin Langhoff
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 9:40 PM, Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com wrote: When deleting an object from the Journal that is an activity bundle, we ought to display an alert with a scary icon.  The alert should clearly state that Journal entries will no longer be able to be opened until the

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Daniel Drake
On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 22:16 +, Aleksey Lim wrote: Hi all, While preparing new 0.88 features, I encountered some in consistence in activities vs. activity bundles case, so I'm going to reveal Activity as regular objects(see [1] ml thread) feature but make it less invasive in case existed

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Aleksey Lim
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:34:45PM +, Daniel Drake wrote: On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 22:16 +, Aleksey Lim wrote: Hi all, While preparing new 0.88 features, I encountered some in consistence in activities vs. activity bundles case, so I'm going to reveal Activity as regular

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Aleksey Lim
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 02:54:49PM +, Aleksey Lim wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:34:45PM +, Daniel Drake wrote: On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 22:16 +, Aleksey Lim wrote: Hi all, While preparing new 0.88 features, I encountered some in consistence in activities vs. activity

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Walter Bender
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 7:34 AM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: On Fri, 2009-11-27 at 22:16 +, Aleksey Lim wrote: Hi all, While preparing new 0.88 features, I encountered some in consistence in activities vs. activity bundles case, so I'm going to reveal Activity as regular

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Wade Brainerd
+1 from me for this feature proposal! Both the under-the-hood and user experience simplifications are clear improvements. I would like to see this as a step towards removing the activity list view, which starts to become redundant once activities can be uninstalled from the Journal. I disagree

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Daniel Drake
2009/11/30 Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com: I disagree that showing activities in the Journal, in addition to activity instances and MIME objects, will cause confusion.  Many activities are more like content.  Activities can be downloaded, copied, modified, and deleted.  In Sugar terminology,

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Aleksey Lim
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 07:58:57PM +, Daniel Drake wrote: 2009/11/30 Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com: I disagree that showing activities in the Journal, in addition to activity instances and MIME objects, will cause confusion.  Many activities are more like content.  Activities can be

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Wade Brainerd
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: 2009/11/30 Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com: I disagree that showing activities in the Journal, in addition to activity instances and MIME objects, will cause confusion.  Many activities are more like content.  Activities can

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Daniel Drake
2009/11/30 Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com: No, but perhaps we could take this opportunity to reduce this problem... When deleting an object from the Journal that is an activity bundle, we ought to display an alert with a scary icon.  The alert should clearly state that Journal entries will no

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Wade Brainerd
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: 2009/11/30 Wade Brainerd wad...@gmail.com: No, but perhaps we could take this opportunity to reduce this problem... When deleting an object from the Journal that is an activity bundle, we ought to display an alert with a

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Walter Bender
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: 2009/11/30 Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com: This isn't quite accurate. We've been adding some pre-loaded content to the Journal for quite some time now, Are you sure? Or are you referring to a manual process that you

Re: [Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-30 Thread Aleksey Lim
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 07:18:47PM -0500, Walter Bender wrote: On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote: 2009/11/30 Walter Bender walter.ben...@gmail.com: This isn't quite accurate. We've been adding some pre-loaded content to the Journal for quite some time now,

[Sugar-devel] [FEATURE] Activity as a regular Journal Object request for inclusion to 0.88

2009-11-27 Thread Aleksey Lim
Hi all, While preparing new 0.88 features, I encountered some in consistence in activities vs. activity bundles case, so I'm going to reveal Activity as regular objects(see [1] ml thread) feature but make it less invasive in case existed user experience.