<p dir="ltr"><br>
On May 12, 2015 6:59 AM, "Stephen Gallagher" <<a href="mailto:sgallagh@redhat.com">sgallagh@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Tue, 2015-05-12 at 06:02 -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:<br>
> > > * Shell extensions: As long as we're going to offer them, we<br>
> > > shouldn't<br>
> > > relegate them to Tweak Tool. Perhaps gnome-software would be a<br>
> > > better<br>
> > > location than gnome-control-center, but either would be better than<br>
> > > Tweak Tool. (But the gnome-shell browser plugin is very crashy at<br>
> > > worst and unreliable at best, so we should fix that first.)<br>
> ><br>
> > Extensions is what happens when designers and developers don't agree.<br>
> > If you know you want extensions, installing gnome-tweak-tool is only<br>
> > a<br>
> > step away. If people want to integrate that better, they can add<br>
> > support<br>
> > to the gnome-shell web browser plugin to show whether or not gnome<br>
> > -tweak-tool<br>
> > is installed, and launch Software to install it through the browser<br>
> > if not.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> At the same time, I think it would be very useful to poll GNOME users<br>
> for what extensions they are using (if any). I think you'll find that<br>
> it's very likely that more users have installed (for example) the<br>
> Alternate Tab extension than are using the default behavior (and it<br>
> would also be interesting to know whether those using the default<br>
> behavior know about the extension).<br>
><br>
> Some other extensions that I personally know a great many people cannot<br>
> live without:<br>
><br>
> * Topicons: I understand that systray icons are not the way the GNOME<br>
> designers want things to work, but FAR too much software exists today<br>
> that relies on these icons. Shunting them to the message tray (pre<br>
> -3.16) or into a tiny little expansion box (post-3.16) or hiding them<br>
> entirely (Wayland) are not valid solutions for this software. Call it<br>
> legacy software if you wish, but not having a sensible compatibility<br>
> layer is harmful to users.<br>
><br>
> * Window List: For many users attempting to locate the window they want<br>
> across a number of workstations, having the window list at the bottom<br>
> of the screen provides a very quick way to see what is on every<br>
> workspace. It's far easier to process a short line of information than<br>
> to 1) go into the Overview. 2) start paging through each workspace. 3)<br>
> scan the entire screen for the window that matches what you want.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Don't get me wrong: the GNOME designers have made many excellent<br>
> choices: I wouldn't be running the GNOME environment if I thought<br>
> otherwise. But some choices have fallen well into the realm of "perfect<br>
> is the enemy of good". It doesn't matter how "clean" an experience<br>
> feels on paper if people trying to use it get frustrated. There are<br>
> many extensions out there to alleviate some of these pains, but there<br>
> are two problems:<br>
><br>
> 1) Extensions aren't common knowledge. Most people assume that GNOME is<br>
> immutable and limited to only the few choices allowed by gnome<br>
> -settings. Related to the above: no matter how easy it might be to<br>
> install GNOME Tweak Tool, it's not *discoverable*. There are no hints<br>
> anywhere that you might want or need it. There are no links from Fedora<br>
> to popular extension pages, etc.<br>
><br>
> 2) Extensions aren't (and as I understand it, cannot be) stable API. So<br>
> even when someone has discovered an extension that they really cannot<br>
> survive without, there's no guarantee that it won't be broken on the<br>
> next update. This problem isn't solvable by GNOME, but it can be<br>
> solvable by Fedora: we could identify a set of high-value extensions<br>
> and work with their authors to have them ready before we release new<br>
> versions of Workstation.<br>
><br>
><br>
> ...<br>
> > > * Power: The "power button action" and "when laptop lid is closed"<br>
> > > settings would be good to have in the Power panel. At least we need<br>
> > > the laptop lid setting; that's easy and commonly-requested.<br>
> ><br>
> > Absolutely not. Rationale is in the gnome-settings-daemon bugs and<br>
> > commit messages for that.<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> Sorry Bastien, but "go look at the git/bz history" is not helpful. I'm<br>
> also curious why we don't allow users to select lid-close options. At<br>
> least a pointer to one such example of the rationale would be useful.<br>
><br>
><br>
> > > * Top bar: Maybe show date in clock could live in the Date & Time<br>
> > > panel, where the 12/24 hour setting is.<br>
> ><br>
> > We already show it inside the menu, is that not enough?<br>
> ><br>
><br>
> When someone wants to know the date, it's usually because they need to<br>
> use it for something (like signing a check, etc.) right now. Needing<br>
> more than a quick glance to the top of the screen is wasteful,<br>
> particularly since the GNOME design policy is to have none of that<br>
> space used for anything else. This is one of those cases where I cannot<br>
> figure out why the default doesn't simply include the date. I can<br>
> understand having seconds or week numbers in the tweak tool; those are<br>
> far less interesting.<br>
> --<br>
> desktop mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org">desktop@lists.fedoraproject.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop">https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop</a><br></p>
<p dir="ltr">I completely agree with Stephen. Extensions are probably the norm, not the exception - and it doesn't take hard data to see that extensions are fun and often useful. It is *not* an insult to upstream design theory. Enable themes and drop in behavior extensions (which gnome-shell has done well, besides API stability and g-s-s pretending they don't exist) and creative, enthusiastic communities spring up. People that are passionate about using your product are a Good Thing.</p>
<p dir="ltr">--Pete </p>