rawhide report: 20060110 changes [extras packages moved to core]

[Jeff Spaleta]

On 1/11/06, Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net> wrote:
> Le mercredi 11 janvier 2006 à 13:49 -0500, Jeff Spaleta a écrit :
> > and she has chosen on her own to use a mechanism that looks a
> > hell of a lot more like "management" than "browsing."
>
> So what ?
> Where did I wrote management was bad or useless ?
> You're the one who insists it's one or the other. In all your messages
> you clearly indicate the behaviour of both apps is very different. That
> makes the whole overlap argument moot IMHO.

If browsing is the important functionality that gthumb is meant to
address... nautilus/eog browses and nautilus/eog and gthumb represent
duplication.
If collection management is the important functionality that gthumb is
meant to address... f-spot and gthumb represent duplication.


> Unless you have a scientific user study which proves one is better than
> the other for the overwhelming majority of fedora users. And takes more
> than one test subject (who haven't even been exposed to f-spot yet if I
> read you properly)

If you want to start claiming scientific user studies is the bar that
must be met in this discussion, that's fine with me. I'm more than
willing to accept that and avoid the issue of "average user" in this
discussion completely. I demand you pony up your scientific study
which suggests that that "browsing"  functionality is important when
you have many photos. I bring up my ancedotal personal experience
primarily to counterweight your unsupported claim that browsing is
really the preferred way to handle piles of photos.  I'll be the pot
to your kettle any day of the week.

> It would have been different if the app you wanted to remove had a
> significant cost in maintenance, volume or pulled deps. But it's not
> even the case.

Were these factors important when GQView was removed in favor of
gthumb? Surely the dependancy list and size of GQView were of similiar
burdensome nature.

-jef