Four Tweaks for Gnome 3

[Pasha R]

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Olav Vitters <olav at vitters.nl> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 02:04:17PM +0100, Ian Malone wrote:
>> On 3 June 2011 13:19, Olav Vitters <olav at vitters.nl> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 03, 2011 at 07:57:18AM -0400, Genes MailLists wrote:
>> >> On 06/03/2011 05:39 AM, Olav Vitters wrote:
>> >> ings.
>> >> >
>>
>> >>   I don't agree - I think the right solution is that extensions vie to
>> >> be accepted as part of Gnome Core - otherwise its a losing battle.
>> >
>> > Extensions are maintained by various people. Further, they're called
>> > extensions, they're not part of GNOME because for some reason they
>> > weren't wanted.
>> >
>> > Arguing that extensions should be part of GNOME shell wouldn't make them
>> > extensions anymore.
>> >
>> > Could you explain why instead of allowing anyone to write extensions,
>> > you want to limit it to the ones with a GNOME Git account? In practice
>> > it'll end up being just the one gnome-shell-extension maintainer? It
>> > does not make sense to me.
>> >
>>
>> There's obviously going to be a mix of extensions that are really
>> extensions (things some people want that most don't really need or
>> want) and extensions that fix things that are wrong at the moment. I'm
>> hoping that the Gnome team are taking notice of some of the work
>> that's being done and their next iteration of Gnome 3.0 is saner.
>
> No worries then; I'm actively responding in Fedora lists (and others)
> while I normally do not use Fedora. Further, various extensions are
> being proposed upstream (more exposure).
> Though I'm not a GNOME shell developer, I do see the amount of feedback
> they get and it is enough. I've noted when stuff has been raised before.
> Note that if there is an issue and it has been raised, it could very
> well be 'outstanding'; seems sometimes there is the assumption
> everything is set in stone and so on.
>
> Seems the rest of your email is not about extensions anymore. I think it
> would have been better as a new thread as it seems unrelated to the
> distribution of extensions.
>
>> I'm currently dividing the things that irritate me into familiarity
>> issues (not long term problems) and fundamental issues/regressions.
>> Some of the later so far (mainly to do with the activities window) in
>> short form:
>> 1. Applications are now presented in a 2D array across the whole
>> screen. This makes looking for something more difficult than scanning
>> down a straight list. Particularly as the icons are really too big.
>> Might look cool on an iPhone, less useful on a 13" widescreen laptop.
>> Haven't dared try it on my desktop pc yet.
>
> I don't have any issues. Search seems nice. This has been raised before
> though.

Search is good for intermediate and advanced users, beginners probably
won't use it. Also, does not always give expected results, especially
if you throw in translations.

>
>> 2. Associated with #1, more mouse-distance and clicks to start an
>> application. Bring up activities window from the dash involves either
>> keystroke or mouse to top left (hard into corner or top left and
>> click) then mouse down to application and click again. The analogous
>> action under Gnome 2 was move to quickstart icon on the panel and
>> click. Using the applications menu involves opening the activities
>> window, moving (1/3 screen) across to select applications and then
>> searching through for the one you want (see #1). If you want to select
>> a category you've got to move across the screen again.
>
> You can make stuff as a favourite. Further, there are various ways to
> make it easier if you want something quick. See also
> https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet.
>
> This has been raised before.

Having a launcher in immediate visibility is much easier for everyone,
especially for children.
Also, I can't find a possibility to add a custom launcher. In Gnome 2
it was easy to drag URL from browser to panel or desktop to create a
launcher for that URL. It was also easy to create customized launcher
for application. I don't see any of these features in Gnome 3.

>
>> 3. Activities screen tends to wait while applications are busy, on a
>> dual core machine. This is horrible. With a busy application I should
>> be able to move across to another one and work in that. If I forget
>> and start the activites screen I'm locked out for a while.
>
> Sounds like a bug. I've seen some issues about GNOME shell slowing down
> (e.g. due to Java bugs and so on). Please file a bug to ensure it gets
> fixed.
>
>> 4. What applications are running? Hard to see if a window has crashed
>> or closed, because the presentation through the dash collapses that
>> information and mixes it with the favourites.
>
> I don't understand this bit. Please just bring it up @ #gnome-design or
> send an email to gnome-shell-list.

I think Ian means that there is nothing like bottom panel, showing
running applications.

>
>> 5. What is the application name at the top right /for/? Clicking on it
>> presents a drop down that lets me quit the app, but I can think of at
>> least three other ways to do that in a typical application. It doesn't
>> allow anything else that might be useful like opening another
>> instance.
>
> More functionality is being planned for either 3.2 or 3.4. Either
> something similar (but not the same) as the global menu thing, or
> something more limited.
>
>> 6. Similarly the open-current-window feature of the dash is a good
>> idea, but somehow it feels like it could be improved. If I click on
>> firefox I want to open another window, not find the open firefox (it's
>> a big window, it's obvious on the activities screen and in alt-tab).
>> Yes right click gives that option, but this is a bit unsatisfactory
>> for what is often the primary action. The Gnome people don't like
>> configurability, but how about splitting the dash into sections for
>> two the two actions, or splitting the (gigantic) icons in two?
>
> There was discussion about this, but not sure. At the moment there is no
> infrastructure for #5 (jump lists / global menu). Pretty sure it'll more
> thought will go into this in future.

Ian mentioned lack of configurability and IMHO it is root of most
problems people talk about.

>
>> 7. Multiple entry points into the same limited configuration menu.
>> This annoys me whenever I run into it. Used to be the case in older
>> distros, I think Mandriva had something like it, late RH / early
>> Fedora maybe. The KDE on the oldish Slackware I run at work.
>> Essentially there are lots of ways to get into a configuration menu,
>> which turns out to be the same one. So if trying to change settings
>> you spend lots of time trying to find an configuration editor to
>> change something (see 1#, #2) and then it turns out to start the same
>> application that didn't do what you wanted the last time. F12/F13
>> finally had some quite powerful and useful configuration tools.
>
> Could you expand on this? I think it is better if you can find your
> setting right?
>
>> I think most of these problems could be solved if someone broke into
>> Gnome HQ and confiscated all their touchpad PCs.
>
> There is no HQ and it is just a random collection of people whom all
> have their own thoughts and ideas. Feel free to help/assist.