On 09/01/2009, Douglas Philips <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I'm a bit hesitant to talk about this here for being misinterpreted,
> but I think the elephant in the room is bugging me even more than
> that. :)
>
> The following was posted over on the mercurial list, but I think it
> needs to be talked about here:
> (my comments follow)
>
> On 2009 Jan 9, at 2:33 AM, Peter Arrenbrecht wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Thomas Burdick <[email protected]
> > > wrote:
> >> TortoiseHg could help win some of the people I work with over if it had
> some
> >> usability work done on it. I don't know if its the use of toolbox
> buttons
> >> instead of form buttons, gtk+ (it looks plain wrong in windows...), or a
> >> combination of both but no one I've talked to thought the UI was
> intuitive.
> >> #1 complaint/issue was workflow - typically you go down a form, and the
> >> buttons to operate things are at the top. I don't think the other
> tortoise's
> >> do this #2 complaint/issue - why aren't the commands the same for the
> >> tortoise menu as hg help. what is synchronize and why don't I get things
> like
> >> pull, push, update, revert, rollback etc as menu options instead of this
> silly
> >> business with toolbox buttons. I try telling these guys "pull" and
> "push"
> >> and they ask me, where is push/pull in the menu.
> >
> > Well, part of the Summer of Code project was to do such changes.
> > Sadly, they weren't accepted into TortoiseHg. The student had got rid
> > of the close buttons, redone some dialogs to better follow established
> > style, etc. And there was a Debian package, too. Maybe I wasn't
> > insistent enough to help him get it into THg. Problem is, I'm not a
> > core THg developer myself, so coaching this project was a little
> > difficult. But this work still exists! Maybe it can still serve as a
> > basis:
> >
> > http://www.bitbucket.org/gpoo/soc/overview/
> >
> > -parren
> >>
>
> I was very happy to see this project get started, and I am curious to
> know where it stands with the TortoiseHG developers.
> I am curious for two reasons:
> a) Having this kind of work would have made TortoiseHG easier to
> accept in my work group.
> b) More importantly because it sends a message about how non-core-
> developer efforts are treated.
>
> I understand that this is all volunteer, and I very much appreciate
> the work that has gone into TortoiseHG so far.
> It is hard to be optimistic about carving out time to work on THg when
> it seems that such work would just languish...
> and I very much would like to figure out how to contribute in a way
> that is likely to be more successful than the GSoC work was at being
> adopted...
>
You probably want to hear this from TK, but here is a quick summary as I saw
it:
The patch series you point to contains the following changes
1) remove quit buttons
2) transform a few minor dialogs to glade (about, backout, merge, update)
3) prepare some widgets for a stand alone application
4) add a stand alone application using glade for gui
5) make setup.py work outside Windows (e.g. Linux)
6) add submenus on Nautilus
As I recall it the main objection was to use glade for modelling the GUI
instead of doing everything in python.
This effectively rejects changes 2 and 4 (major rework needed)
The thread is here -
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=c50411aaaba377b34f3d.1219092640%40calcifer&forum_name=tortoisehg-develop
Patches 1, 5, 6 could probably be tested individually right now if somebody
fixed the minor issues and resubmitted them.
For screenshots of 1, 2, 3, and 4, see
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/LinuxFileManagerIntegrationStatus
Regards,
Peer
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It is the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Xq1LFB
_______________________________________________
Tortoisehg-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tortoisehg-develop
