[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: From release notes for FC5T3 (web)

gb spam wrote:
> On 3/7/06, Andy Green <andy warmcat com> wrote:
>> gb spam wrote:
>>> Perhaps you should check the list - it was "debated" at length there
>>> with all pro-choice arguments dismissed, sometimes with valid points,
>>> but often without valid points.
>> I do subscribe to it... what was the thread called?  A quick search on
>> 'everything' in the last 30 days in Thunderbird showed lots of posts but
>> not the magic thread as I could recognize it.
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2006-January/msg01136.html
> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/2006-February/msg01632.html
> Its cropped up in other threads too.

I read the whole of the threads.  Appears a lot of the frustration is
coming into existence solely because the replacement UI does not seem to
allow one to feel that one has selected (as in ticking the visible
checkboxes) everything easily.  Maybe aside from the other listed
problems people feel cheated or that they are missing out when they
become exhausted trying to tick boxes by hand.  If so then small
improvements to the UI might let people feel they were rapidly able to
emulate the old behaviour they wanted (despite that checking all the
boxes leaves 800 packages uninstalled according to one poster).  At the
least in the case where a guy really did want most packages it shouldn't
take him "an hour" as one guy reported each install to peck out his desires.

Put that way it starts to sound like a "Gnome Usability Mindset" -type
problem I really hope that isn't it and it is just not finished yet.

Anyway the arguments against people routinely installing everything
still stand to me.  I really hope though that things do head towards a
really core Core, even a precooked tarball that is splatted onto the HDD
would suit me for that, a 20-second Core install followed

> remark - it almost made me use that ugly abbreviation - LOL.   No
> wait, damn, it did.

It's no use, learn to love the neololism.


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]