Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
2009/7/10 Eben Eliason e...@laptop.org: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 16:25, Eben Eliasone...@laptop.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:01:19AM -0400, Eben Eliason wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: But are you meaning that we should name the current one Keep a copy and when we have versions add Keep? No, no. I'm urging that we name it Keep new version now if we rename it, so that it's meaning doesn't change down the road when versions are introduced. Keep new version seems a lot closer to a description of the implementation than of the user-desired result. Unless this new version becomes the active one (i.e., the one upon which the user continues to work, assuming they don't close the application), isn't the result of the button press better called Keep[ing of a] backup version? I'm happy to entertain other terminology. All I'm really trying to get across is that, technically, this action is strictly not what I interpreted as keep a copy in the presence of versions, and I don't want to confuse the terminology later by mixing up the terms. I'd be equally satisfied, I think, by finding a better term for what I'm presently describing as keep a copy, wherein a brand new tree_id is assigned to the copy, detaching it from the history (and collaboration scope) of the original. The fundamental issue is whether or not version/collaboration history is retained with the action, so let's ensure that we name both of these types of copy operations at the same time, even if we only have one of them for now, so that it can be extended later. Ben's suggestion of checkpoint could work. Perhaps Keep checkpoint would be better to retain the action. You're right that it's more like keep backup versionthat is, the keep operation which retains the tree_id basically writes the current state of the activity as a version (the just-now-previous one), and allows you to continue working in the most current one. No branching, in the traditional sense, happens here. Should we discuss this in sugar-devel? Why not asking any of the teachers in IAEP what is more natural for them? Makes sense to me, as long as we can convey to them first the distinction between the two. The problem at hand is that keep a copy makes perfect sense, until you toss in this alternate action to confuse things. As another note, I have another reason why I interpreted keep a copy to mean new tree_id, and not just new version. Looking at the design mockups for the action/object views of the Journal, we designed the object view to show only the most recent version of any object. That is, each object is represented just once in that list. Here, it seems like keep a copy should mean give me a new object in this list; Keeping a version is just an action which snapshots a previous state of the current object, without making a true copy of it. Maybe we could always refer to versions as history in Sugar (seems logical, given the Journal metaphor!). Then, we could call what the new tree_id case keep a copy as I initially suggested, and the new version_id case keep in history, to indicate that pressing it will add a new listing in the history of the current object. Eben Regards, Tomeu Eben Regards, Tomeu Eben ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel You're right eben, sorry for not thinking it through (and the current translation in pt_PT of keep is just keep in all releases). I'd like to suggest that when an auto-save is done, to have the keep button either become unsensitive or visually change into a closed folder with the secondary palette saying Kept X minutes ago. This is inspired by how Gmail works. Eduardo ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 05:41, Eben Eliasone...@laptop.org wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. I use Keep in Turtle Art when I am building multiple programs that I want to use in lessons. When I have one working as I want, I click Keep. Then I can edit the program to create something related, or toss it and start fresh. It makes sense to Keep the framework for a project as a template, so that you don't have to start fresh each time, and you don't forget any of the bits. There are other use cases. I urge again that keep a copy is not what is intended, in the long run. Without proper versions, of course, this is effectively how it behaves. Therefore, it's no surprise many saw it this way. But with versions, the keep button is actually a keep new version button. As mentioned before, a new version retains the tree_id, whereas a true copy does not. But are you meaning that we should name the current one Keep a copy and when we have versions add Keep? I don't think that the name is the problem. This needs to be added to the list of things that aren't inherently discoverable, where we should help the teachers to know when and how they can show their students the extra power available to them. I have started a Wiki page for such things, [[The undiscoverable]]. Regards, Tomeu -- Silent Thunder (默雷/धर्ममेघशब्दगर्ज/دھرممیگھشبدگر ج) is my name And Children are my nation. The Cosmos is my dwelling place, The Truth my destination. http://earthtreasury.org/worknet (Edward Mokurai Cherlin) ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On 11 Jul 2009, at 19:15, Edward Cherlin wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 2:28 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 05:41, Eben Eliasone...@laptop.org wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/ reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re- mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. I use Keep in Turtle Art when I am building multiple programs that I want to use in lessons. When I have one working as I want, I click Keep. Then I can edit the program to create something related, or toss it and start fresh. Regarding the current implementation of Keep, I would NOT recommend you use this work flow!! I did much the same last year with TurtleArt, working through 20 or so Logo examples that Uruguay had blogged about for lesson plans (I wanted to see how far TA would go using old Logo examples, I think sin/ cos stuff back then was the first blocker). Any way, back to my story, after the first 20 or so the exercises were getting tougher and I wanted to refer back to earlier solutions so I could combine them. If you've been using Keep, your trail of entries are all considered by the Sugar shell as the same activity (all have the same activity_id). If you try to resume an instance of the same activity more than once (for reference/comparison), Sugar shell will just switch you to the already instance activity. To refer to any earlier version you will have to Stop your current version, resume the other version, work out what you wanted to see, try to remember it, Stop again, find your current version again and resume it. In the end I found I had to take a screenshot of every TA pervious project version, so that I could switch from an active TA version to an old screenshot for reference. It was a major pain, especially as back then you had to view images in Browse, and that browse was raising Keep Error every time you closed! I gave up working on those TA/Logo class lesson plans not long after. Regards, --Gary ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 05:41, Eben Eliasone...@laptop.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Eduardo H. Silvahoboprim...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/7/9 Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org: On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:29, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... It's far from the truth in that it's not normally what you want to do. My quoting-foo is bad, so I've caused confusion (in myself, too :)). To save your work, simply click the Stop button or change so that another activity has focus. If you click Keep, you'll end up with 2 copies - one from when you clicked Keep, and one from when you clicked Stop (or focused on another activity). As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. This is a great explanation -- it should be in the HIG or something. But the biggest problem is how do we explain this to users without them having to read the HIG (or manual)? Should be called Keep a copy? +1 For a while, in the pt_PT translation of Sugar I did, I named the Keep button as Keep a copy. I urge again that keep a copy is not what is intended, in the long run. Without proper versions, of course, this is effectively how it behaves. Therefore, it's no surprise many saw it this way. But with versions, the keep button is actually a keep new version button. As mentioned before, a new version retains the tree_id, whereas a true copy does not. But are you meaning that we should name the current one Keep a copy and when we have versions add Keep? Regards, Tomeu Since versions are on the way, we should make sure to clarify the distinction! Eben Regards, Tomeu Daniel Martin ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 05:41, Eben Eliasone...@laptop.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Eduardo H. Silvahoboprim...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/7/9 Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org: On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:29, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... It's far from the truth in that it's not normally what you want to do. My quoting-foo is bad, so I've caused confusion (in myself, too :)). To save your work, simply click the Stop button or change so that another activity has focus. If you click Keep, you'll end up with 2 copies - one from when you clicked Keep, and one from when you clicked Stop (or focused on another activity). As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. This is a great explanation -- it should be in the HIG or something. But the biggest problem is how do we explain this to users without them having to read the HIG (or manual)? Should be called Keep a copy? +1 For a while, in the pt_PT translation of Sugar I did, I named the Keep button as Keep a copy. I urge again that keep a copy is not what is intended, in the long run. Without proper versions, of course, this is effectively how it behaves. Therefore, it's no surprise many saw it this way. But with versions, the keep button is actually a keep new version button. As mentioned before, a new version retains the tree_id, whereas a true copy does not. But are you meaning that we should name the current one Keep a copy and when we have versions add Keep? No, no. I'm urging that we name it Keep new version now if we rename it, so that it's meaning doesn't change down the road when versions are introduced. Eben Regards, Tomeu Since versions are on the way, we should make sure to clarify the distinction! Eben Regards, Tomeu Daniel Martin ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:01:19AM -0400, Eben Eliason wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: But are you meaning that we should name the current one Keep a copy and when we have versions add Keep? No, no. I'm urging that we name it Keep new version now if we rename it, so that it's meaning doesn't change down the road when versions are introduced. Keep new version seems a lot closer to a description of the implementation than of the user-desired result. Unless this new version becomes the active one (i.e., the one upon which the user continues to work, assuming they don't close the application), isn't the result of the button press better called Keep[ing of a] backup version? Regards, Tomeu Eben pgpXqzVGqhDb4.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
Eben Eliason wrote: No, no. I'm urging that we name it Keep new version now if we rename it, so that it's meaning doesn't change down the road when versions are introduced. We should call it Checkpoint and let the localization teams sort it out. The English-speakers will have no problem understanding what it means; they've been playing video games with checkpoints for their whole lives. --Ben signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:01:19AM -0400, Eben Eliason wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: But are you meaning that we should name the current one Keep a copy and when we have versions add Keep? No, no. I'm urging that we name it Keep new version now if we rename it, so that it's meaning doesn't change down the road when versions are introduced. Keep new version seems a lot closer to a description of the implementation than of the user-desired result. Unless this new version becomes the active one (i.e., the one upon which the user continues to work, assuming they don't close the application), isn't the result of the button press better called Keep[ing of a] backup version? I'm happy to entertain other terminology. All I'm really trying to get across is that, technically, this action is strictly not what I interpreted as keep a copy in the presence of versions, and I don't want to confuse the terminology later by mixing up the terms. I'd be equally satisfied, I think, by finding a better term for what I'm presently describing as keep a copy, wherein a brand new tree_id is assigned to the copy, detaching it from the history (and collaboration scope) of the original. The fundamental issue is whether or not version/collaboration history is retained with the action, so let's ensure that we name both of these types of copy operations at the same time, even if we only have one of them for now, so that it can be extended later. Ben's suggestion of checkpoint could work. Perhaps Keep checkpoint would be better to retain the action. You're right that it's more like keep backup versionthat is, the keep operation which retains the tree_id basically writes the current state of the activity as a version (the just-now-previous one), and allows you to continue working in the most current one. No branching, in the traditional sense, happens here. Eben Regards, Tomeu Eben ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 16:25, Eben Eliasone...@laptop.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:01:19AM -0400, Eben Eliason wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: But are you meaning that we should name the current one Keep a copy and when we have versions add Keep? No, no. I'm urging that we name it Keep new version now if we rename it, so that it's meaning doesn't change down the road when versions are introduced. Keep new version seems a lot closer to a description of the implementation than of the user-desired result. Unless this new version becomes the active one (i.e., the one upon which the user continues to work, assuming they don't close the application), isn't the result of the button press better called Keep[ing of a] backup version? I'm happy to entertain other terminology. All I'm really trying to get across is that, technically, this action is strictly not what I interpreted as keep a copy in the presence of versions, and I don't want to confuse the terminology later by mixing up the terms. I'd be equally satisfied, I think, by finding a better term for what I'm presently describing as keep a copy, wherein a brand new tree_id is assigned to the copy, detaching it from the history (and collaboration scope) of the original. The fundamental issue is whether or not version/collaboration history is retained with the action, so let's ensure that we name both of these types of copy operations at the same time, even if we only have one of them for now, so that it can be extended later. Ben's suggestion of checkpoint could work. Perhaps Keep checkpoint would be better to retain the action. You're right that it's more like keep backup versionthat is, the keep operation which retains the tree_id basically writes the current state of the activity as a version (the just-now-previous one), and allows you to continue working in the most current one. No branching, in the traditional sense, happens here. Should we discuss this in sugar-devel? Why not asking any of the teachers in IAEP what is more natural for them? Regards, Tomeu Eben Regards, Tomeu Eben ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 16:25, Eben Eliasone...@laptop.org wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:01:19AM -0400, Eben Eliason wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: But are you meaning that we should name the current one Keep a copy and when we have versions add Keep? No, no. I'm urging that we name it Keep new version now if we rename it, so that it's meaning doesn't change down the road when versions are introduced. Keep new version seems a lot closer to a description of the implementation than of the user-desired result. Unless this new version becomes the active one (i.e., the one upon which the user continues to work, assuming they don't close the application), isn't the result of the button press better called Keep[ing of a] backup version? I'm happy to entertain other terminology. All I'm really trying to get across is that, technically, this action is strictly not what I interpreted as keep a copy in the presence of versions, and I don't want to confuse the terminology later by mixing up the terms. I'd be equally satisfied, I think, by finding a better term for what I'm presently describing as keep a copy, wherein a brand new tree_id is assigned to the copy, detaching it from the history (and collaboration scope) of the original. The fundamental issue is whether or not version/collaboration history is retained with the action, so let's ensure that we name both of these types of copy operations at the same time, even if we only have one of them for now, so that it can be extended later. Ben's suggestion of checkpoint could work. Perhaps Keep checkpoint would be better to retain the action. You're right that it's more like keep backup versionthat is, the keep operation which retains the tree_id basically writes the current state of the activity as a version (the just-now-previous one), and allows you to continue working in the most current one. No branching, in the traditional sense, happens here. Should we discuss this in sugar-devel? Why not asking any of the teachers in IAEP what is more natural for them? Makes sense to me, as long as we can convey to them first the distinction between the two. The problem at hand is that keep a copy makes perfect sense, until you toss in this alternate action to confuse things. As another note, I have another reason why I interpreted keep a copy to mean new tree_id, and not just new version. Looking at the design mockups for the action/object views of the Journal, we designed the object view to show only the most recent version of any object. That is, each object is represented just once in that list. Here, it seems like keep a copy should mean give me a new object in this list; Keeping a version is just an action which snapshots a previous state of the current object, without making a true copy of it. Maybe we could always refer to versions as history in Sugar (seems logical, given the Journal metaphor!). Then, we could call what the new tree_id case keep a copy as I initially suggested, and the new version_id case keep in history, to indicate that pressing it will add a new listing in the history of the current object. Eben Regards, Tomeu Eben Regards, Tomeu Eben ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Perhaps it's time for a rethink/redesign. This functionality could be moved to the journal itself, in a place where it can be presented with more context, something like Create duplicate copy. Or even some kind of visual feedback (to appear after clicking Keep) that makes it pretty obvious that you've just forked your work - that way you'd quickly learn the true functionality and know when and when not to use it. Yes, 100% agree. ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... In case anyone lacks context, here's what the HIG says about keep: it's saving a copy/backup file: activities can ... specify keep-hints which prompt the system to keep a copy. ... a child may choose to invoke a keep-hint by selecting the keep in journal button ... -- http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Design_Team/Human_Interface_Guidelines#The_Notion_of_.22Keeping.22 Are there any other discussions like activity versioning and datastore versioning that are relevant that people could share for context? some kind of visual feedback (to appear after clicking Keep) that makes it pretty obvious that you've just forked your work - that way you'd quickly learn the true functionality and know when and when not to use it. Good idea. Daniel Martin pgpWE2MkPSaZP.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... It's far from the truth in that it's not normally what you want to do. To save your work, simply click the Stop button or change so that another activity has focus. If you click Keep, you'll end up with 2 copies - one from when you clicked Keep, and one from when you clicked Stop (or focused on another activity). As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. Daniel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... It's far from the truth in that it's not normally what you want to do. My quoting-foo is bad, so I've caused confusion (in myself, too :)). To save your work, simply click the Stop button or change so that another activity has focus. If you click Keep, you'll end up with 2 copies - one from when you clicked Keep, and one from when you clicked Stop (or focused on another activity). As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. This is a great explanation -- it should be in the HIG or something. Daniel Martin pgpWVf3l0Cxrl.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:29, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... It's far from the truth in that it's not normally what you want to do. My quoting-foo is bad, so I've caused confusion (in myself, too :)). To save your work, simply click the Stop button or change so that another activity has focus. If you click Keep, you'll end up with 2 copies - one from when you clicked Keep, and one from when you clicked Stop (or focused on another activity). As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. This is a great explanation -- it should be in the HIG or something. But the biggest problem is how do we explain this to users without them having to read the HIG (or manual)? Should be called Keep a copy? Regards, Tomeu Daniel Martin ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 02:03:06PM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote: On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:29, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. This is a great explanation -- it should be in the HIG or something. But the biggest problem is how do we explain this to users without them having to read the HIG (or manual)? Of course. Should be called Keep a copy? Backup? Daniel Martin Regards, Tomeu Martin pgpSt5Tw3PtSc.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Gary C Marting...@garycmartin.com wrote: On 9 Jul 2009, at 11:29, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. +1 That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... It's far from the truth in that it's not normally what you want to do. My quoting-foo is bad, so I've caused confusion (in myself, too :)). To save your work, simply click the Stop button or change so that another activity has focus. If you click Keep, you'll end up with 2 copies - one from when you clicked Keep, and one from when you clicked Stop (or focused on another activity). As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/ reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. Exactly. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. Not exactly. This would work, but I wouldn't call this a recommended use. To start a new document from a template, it would be more appropriate to Create a copy (which should exist in the Journal itself), or Keep a copy (which would do the same thing, but from within the activity) This is a great explanation -- it should be in the HIG or something. Hmmm, this still does not cover the special behaviour that Sugar now treats those Journal entries with. All these entries will have the same activity_id, Sugar shell uses this ID to know if it already has Yes, that's intended. Keep actually means Keep a new version We don't have proper versions yet, but that's the model. an Activity resumed. If an Activity with a matching activity_id is already instanced, resuming one of the older/newer entries will just switch you to the existing instance (with no change of content). Collaborating, with the Sugar shell treating any single entry in this long chain of entries as the same, is likely to cause quite some confusion for those involved as well... Perhaps visually showing all 'kept' entries as one single block (not multiple entries), with the past ones visually 'depreciated' in some This was our thought behind the design mockups for the object view. There would be one entry per object in the list, with a way to expand or reveal past versions. The opposite, however, is true of the design for the action list. Each version is created as part of a unique activity session, so each of these would be recorded as a distinct action, and refer to the associated version. way (like old undo states), might help? Perhaps the keep button is just wrong altogether. I think it's really important to have a manual method of invoking the equivalent of saving. Maybe labeling the Keep button something like Keep extra version would help. Maybe Sascha's GSoC version work will help us sort out the correct behaviour here. Yes, it may. Eben Regards, --Gary ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Tomeu Vizosoto...@sugarlabs.org wrote: On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:29, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... It's far from the truth in that it's not normally what you want to do. My quoting-foo is bad, so I've caused confusion (in myself, too :)). To save your work, simply click the Stop button or change so that another activity has focus. If you click Keep, you'll end up with 2 copies - one from when you clicked Keep, and one from when you clicked Stop (or focused on another activity). As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. This is a great explanation -- it should be in the HIG or something. But the biggest problem is how do we explain this to users without them having to read the HIG (or manual)? Should be called Keep a copy? Careful, here. keep a copy really is a fundamentally different action. Keeping a copy will result in a new tree_id; Just keeping (or keeping a new version) will only result in a new version_id. We need to find a way to make these actions distinct. Eben Regards, Tomeu Daniel Martin ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
Hi All, 8 months in the tank at 1CC sitting next to Eben, you'd think I know how this was designed to work ;-( I've actually read the HIG too! I see two case here: Case 1 - Create something in one activity and then use it right away another. I forgot that switching to a new activity puts a copy of the old one on the Journal (20+ e-mails on that subject alone last year!). I'll try Paint then just switch to Memorize next time I'm in a class and see if that works and makes sense to the kids. One additional confusion is that Memorize has Save Game and Load Game options. You need to create a game then save it then load it from the Journal to play a new game you just created. Looks like the programmer for Memorize didn't grok the HIG details on Keep either, or did they? Case 2 - Create something in one activity then create something else in the same activity. The launch, create, quit, launch again work flow seems inelegant to say the least. A New button which saves the current file and opens a new blank file sounds like nice way to make this easier. BTW everyone I have seen use Sugar has trouble finding the Stop button. FYI my philosophy is that the user is never wrong. They may do something which results in unanticipated consequences or they may do something which the programmer didn't intend, but its never wrong. If they click a few extra times or lose their data until they figure out a way to do what they want, so be it. The tools are there to be used as they see fit. The trainer on the other hand should know better... Thanks, Greg S ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
Re: [Sugar-devel] Nobody understands Keep
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 7:55 PM, Eduardo H. Silvahoboprim...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/7/9 Tomeu Vizoso to...@sugarlabs.org: On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 12:29, Martin Denglermar...@martindengler.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 11:22:16AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: On Thu, 2009-07-09 at 10:45 +0100, Martin Dengler wrote: On Thu, Jul 09, 2009 at 09:52:23AM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote: Nobody in the world seems to understand the Keep button. People think it's for regular saving and you should do it before you close or switch away from your activity. That's not far from the truth, right? At least in any work-losing or surprising way... It's far from the truth in that it's not normally what you want to do. My quoting-foo is bad, so I've caused confusion (in myself, too :)). To save your work, simply click the Stop button or change so that another activity has focus. If you click Keep, you'll end up with 2 copies - one from when you clicked Keep, and one from when you clicked Stop (or focused on another activity). As far as I understand it, Keep is useful for these types of scenarios: - you've done a lot of work but now it's time to refactor/reorganize the whole thing. However you want to keep a copy of the rough version you have now, as insurance or perhaps for reference while you re-mangle the work. - you've made a template for something, now you want to save that template (as a blank template) before starting on a version where you fill in the content. This is a great explanation -- it should be in the HIG or something. But the biggest problem is how do we explain this to users without them having to read the HIG (or manual)? Should be called Keep a copy? +1 For a while, in the pt_PT translation of Sugar I did, I named the Keep button as Keep a copy. I urge again that keep a copy is not what is intended, in the long run. Without proper versions, of course, this is effectively how it behaves. Therefore, it's no surprise many saw it this way. But with versions, the keep button is actually a keep new version button. As mentioned before, a new version retains the tree_id, whereas a true copy does not. Since versions are on the way, we should make sure to clarify the distinction! Eben Regards, Tomeu Daniel Martin ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel ___ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
