| |||||||||||||
LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle DirkLinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle DirkPosted Sep 24, 2009 1:59 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (subscriber, #755)In reply to: LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk by JesseW Parent article: LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk
I find I wasn't quite clear enough before hitting post :-)
"usable and workmanlike looking" is the part I was suggesting is supplied by designer/analyst types, and often missing in FOSS projects, because it's not "essential to the base function".
A current example that's driving me insane is Knetworkmanager, as supplied with SuSE 11.0, which I run on my laptop. The Right Way to handle this stuff has been pretty obvious for some time -- supplied, embarassingly enough, by Windows XP... though it often can't keep the links *running* to save its life.
But KNM makes me jump though some non-obvious hoops to get anything done, having to know that I must choose "New Connection" in order to teach it about a network I've never been on before, and having to suffer through a popup menu that completely fills the screen of already learned networks when *none of them are in range*... and which is *in the way* of the other menu as I scroll up to do the thing I actually need to do.
That's the sort of three-click-problem items he was talking about, IMO.
And the simple fact of the matter is that while I could probably contribute to fixing them, the amount of time I have available to deal with the 30 or 40 such things that make it difficult for me to use SuSE/KDE3 on a daily basis limited to "I might hang a ticket, if I don't have to fight to find and sign up for your tracker". And what I *get*, in a lot of cases is "we look forward to your patch".
I've *read* "Smart Questions".
I submit that while I understand -- and even approve of -- the arguments it makes, *that's the difference we're talking about*. If you want Real People to *want* to use your stuff, then *someone* has to deal with those issues.
(Log in to post comments)
LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk Posted Sep 24, 2009 4:42 UTC (Thu) by JesseW (guest, #41816) [Link] Thank you. I appreciate you taking the time to explain this; I've also noticed similar issues. Let me expand on my understanding of the alternative to to this problem, i.e. the process followed by projects that do pay attention to RFEs (Requests For Enhancements, for those following along at home). The maintainers of such projects consider their jobs to be designers/systems analysts, although with the job of selecting the good from what they are given, rather than being able to directly demand it of subordinates, as is done in traditional cathedral-style projects. The projects attract a number of coders who are willing and able to recognise itches when they read RFEs, even if they themselves hadn't felt the itch before. And finally, such projects have users who are aware, able and willing to send in their observations of the problems and rough-edges they encounter and receive courteous appreciation for doing so. Is this impossible? Hardly. Are there many, many projects that arn't like this? Certainly. While I agree that many FOSS projects don't recognise the value of suggestions without code, I'm still uncertain why you consider that having a badly structured interface doesn't screw up "the base function[ality]". I would be surprised to hear of a project that refused a patch fixing a interface wart on the grounds that "interfaces don't matter". There certainly can be really big and long arguments over whether a particular aspect of an interface is a wart or not, but that's quite different than refusing to fix a wart that everyone agrees is there. As for the examples you mention with Knetworkmanager -- those certainly sound like irritations that most folks using it would like to see gone -- likely including some developers. It is frustrating that the response to filing a description of the problem, or even a specification of how the problem could be resolved, implies that no-one but you is responsible for coding it -- it would be much better (and I've seen this) if the response was, "Thanks for clarifying the solution to this apparent problem; that will make it easier for whoever has the skill and time to implement it." But asking for a patch (from the original submitter or someone else) is a reasonable request -- the code needs to come from somewhere. Does this match up with what you've been trying to express?
LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk Posted Sep 24, 2009 13:10 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]
> I'm still uncertain why you consider that having a badly structured interface doesn't screw up "the base function[ality]".
I consider that having a badly structured interfaces *does* screw up the base functionality; that was most of the point of my post. :-)
> I would be surprised to hear of a project that refused a patch fixing a interface wart on the grounds that "interfaces don't matter".
Most projects would accept *the patch*, it's *the bare report* that they're not interested in... and that was the *rest* of the point of my post.
LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk Posted Sep 24, 2009 16:37 UTC (Thu) by JesseW (guest, #41816) [Link]
Well good, then we agree. Thanks for the discussion! ;-)
LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk Posted Sep 24, 2009 9:33 UTC (Thu) by Frej (subscriber, #4165) [Link]
Or just copy the gnome gui. Considerable design resources went in to that.
Although the preferences dialog could use some work - the primary goal (selecting a wireless
LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk Posted Sep 24, 2009 17:27 UTC (Thu) by wstephenson (subscriber, #14795) [Link]
knetworkmanager 0.7 for KDE 3, as shipped in openSUSE 11.0, was written by a kernel hacker, and I jumped in as a KDE developer late in the cycle to do the minimum cleanups needed to get it functional for release. While I am very grateful that Helmut wrote knm3, its UI could do better.
Please have a go of KDE 4 knetworkmanager, currently under development for openSUSE 11.2 and available for 11.1 via the Build Service, and let me know if you think we've improved matters.
LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk Posted Sep 27, 2009 14:19 UTC (Sun) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]
Well, I'd love to, but can I *run* that on 11.0? Without installing KDE4 (which I'm still not using)? And if so, does that mean I have to grab the SRPM and build it myself?
(Thanks for this reply, BTW, and my apologies that my own was so delayed.)
LinuxCon: Some advice from Uncle Dirk Posted Oct 1, 2009 23:41 UTC (Thu) by jmm82 (guest, #59425) [Link]
"But KNM makes me jump though some non-obvious hoops to get anything done, having to know that I must choose "New Connection" in order to teach it about a network I've never been on before, and having to suffer through a popup menu that completely fills the screen of already learned networks when *none of them are in range*... and which is *in the way* of the other menu as I scroll up to do the thing I actually need to do."
Do they have a nm-applet for KDE.
NM in Gnome does not connect to a wireless network automatically unless you have already connected to the network before, but the only time you would have to add a new connection in order to make it appear in the list is for a hidden network. If a network is broadcasting an SSID it will show up in the list and you must click it the first time to connect, but it does not require creating a new connection. Granted it may be a bug in the kde interface.
how does Windows XP do it?
In all fairness it is a Gnome project, just as Amorak(I use Exile now, but it is different) does not run as well on Gnome, Network Manager does not run as well on KDE.
Good points though in your posting.
|
|||||||||||||