Den 19. okt. 2011 08:24, skrev Didier Roche:
[snip]
Now some questions:
- do you have automatic testsuite for them, running on different
versions of upstream projects?
- how do oyu work with firefox in particular, where we update the
released version through release life? We generally avoid shipping
plugins for this reason.
- can you elaborate on one of the major flaw of zeitgeist which seems
a bigger priority to me: when you plug an usb key, or have a
windows/ubuntu partition, as zeitgeist isn't a indexer, we can't see
them in the file lens in particularly. I know that Seif has a script
for that, but it doesn't seem to be suited for indexing and Mikkel has
some concerns about it. Can we put that on the table as one of the
priority for Precise?
I don't think this is simply a technical issue. It's first and foremost
a design issue. When I have opened a file, then you can know that the
file is of some interest to me. The fact that I haven't open a file,
doesn't prove that it isn't interesting, but you just can't know. I
regard Zeitgeist is a logger that enables applications to learn from my
actions, not as a general indexer like Tracker. In order for the dash
and lenses to be effective, I think it should primarily display files
I've shown some interest in. Similarly, the web lens should only display
sites I've actually visited, not intermingle results from Google, since
I haven't shown any interested in all those other sites.
Searching for the unknown is completely different from searching your
personal history. The thing I like most about the current way the lenses
work, is that no results are ever entirely irrelevant, since at some
point, I've chosen to use them all. I'm very concerned that mixing these
types of searches will introduce many false positives, which will reduce
the user experience. Searching for things you've never used is obviously
quite useful, and an interesting field that should be treated as a
separate topic. Because of its nature, you'll want the ability to define
a lot of parameters for such a search, and I'm not convinced that lenses
are ready for that. These are some of the parameters that the lens would
have to have in order to provide a good search for unused things:
* Name (duh)
* Time created (from and to)
* Time modified (from and to)
* Specific folder(s)
* How deep to search
* Specific servers (nfs, samba, ftp, etc)
* Size (to and from)
* User or group the file belongs to
* File type
* Whether or not to search file files content
* Source (did you download it from the web, received it in email,
bit torrent, etc)
These are only the parameters that immediately comes to mind. I'm sure
there are many more. But already, this has become a fairly long list,
and it's likely that you'd want the ability to store that search. From
my perspective, it seems that forcing these types of searches into the
dash will both reduce the quality of results from my log, and reduce the
ability to search for things I've never used. For that reason, I would
recommend that the dash be used only to search for things that are known
to be interesting because it's been used, and that a more powerful
desktop search engine be developed separately. Obviously, this
application would be able to use the same data sources that are used in
the dash, but would provide much greater level of detail. Then the dash
could use stored searches from that app as a source, because then you
have defined an interest, so it's no longer random data, and the results
will still be relevant.
Does it make sense to you? :)
Jo-Erlend Schinstad
--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
