Re: [Fwd: Re: [Synaptic-devel] synaptic-0.52-17 interface]

[Sebastian Heinlein]

Am Montag, den 26.07.2004, 01:41 -0400 schrieb sashko:
> Sebastian Heinlein said the following on 07/25/04 07:49:
> 
> > No, I don't agree. I think that his email adds no value; besides that we
> > now know that "sashko" prefers flaming around instead of taking a look
> > at the archives.
> 
> he-he...
> Now it is developer's turn to bite me. :)  Well I apologize again for 
> being rough, but that was my first reaction after finding that latest 
> release of Synapric, I've just got, is completely unusable in the way I 
> was doing it before. That' why I'm back again to v0.48. :)

It is your freedom to use the software that you want to. 

This is not a question of polemic or offending each other. But you have
initially chosen the level of this discussion.

Furthermore I also don't see why using a software should result in
offending the developers. 


> Nevertheless, I must say that I'm not satisfied by any of your answers 
> to him.
> (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/synaptic-devel/2004-07/msg00050.html)

I would also like to see an answer from Frank. You can tell me more than
the pure fact that you are unsatisfied? It is quite hard to guess
otherwise.


> You guys really took off a lot of extremely useful features but didn't 
> add anything instead.

Take a look at the change log included in each release. By the way I
would call a clearer UI a benefit.


> Example:
> 1) I want "new in repository" packages to be sorted into sections. Can I 
> do that? - The right answer is NO.

As I have already said before, the main focus is not on pure providing
of functionality. Why do you want to accomplish this? In which task?


> 2) I have 2 repositories in my sources.list offering the last version of 
> the same package, but one of them has extremely low download speed. Am I 
> able to choose which one to download from? Well, you know the right 
> answer already.

At first you should put the faster repository before your slower one in
your "sources.list". APT prefers the first mentioned repository
automatically. We are working on a redesigned repository editor, but
that takes more than one hour of work.

Secondly you should check out the menu item "Force Version..." in the
menu "Package" of version 0.52.


> if you want I can add another 10 examples.

I would appreciate this.


> Anyway, take a look on attachment. It took me whole hour to polish that. 

Damn, you are slow. It took me an half hour to get to the current
design.


> I believe everything is clear without comments. Drop-down boxes can be 
> different from your point of view, but the main concept is how I see it.

I made a bunch of UI proposals - some can be found in the archives. Take
a look at the mails from November to spring. I feel very sorry that some
of the discussion have been on IRC and are not archived.

Software development cannot be based on assumed self evidence(ness?).
You have to specify the current problem and find arguments why your new
solution would be a benefit compared to the current implementation. You
cannot develop into the open sky.


> Oh, I almost forgot about those tons of poor  users being "confused by 
> the technical stuff presented in the main window." (c) Sebastian Heinlein.

If you try to be funny - you failed. This also refers to the next
passage.


> To prevent them from getting heart attack I propose to add a 
> radio-button somewhere in the "Preferences" dialog window (assume it is 
> "Appearance" tab) switching between Normal(Beginner) and Advanced 
> interface, which would take off all that confusing tabs, along with all 
> the rest stuff you decide. (perhaps leaving just one Big Green Button - 
> "I  HAVE NO IDEA - JUST DO EVERYTHING FOR ME").  You know, that is how 
> uncle Bill prefers to to do.
> It is obvious that the mentioned radiobutton has to be switched to 
> "Normal" by default.

I don't like using alternative layouts in one app. The learning curve
gets higher if you change the layout later. Secondly users may have
problems to recognize the app that is is reconfigured on another system.
I also don't know why I should not also provide all features and
functions to a novice/normal user? Should he or she change to the other
layout only if or she wants to use one special function? How should a
user get known to the "advanced" functions if he or she never sees them?
And at least it doubles the efforts for documentation.

But this has already been said before in previous discussions.


> So, looking forward to see your comments... and lets watch our language.

You don't need to tell me this.

Regards,

Sebastian