[Bugs] #2141 UNSP: Memory and CPU status indicator for the frame.

[Sugar Labs Bugs]

#2141: Memory and CPU status indicator for the frame.
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
    Reporter:  m_anish                    |          Owner:  tomeu                      
        Type:  enhancement                |         Status:  new                        
    Priority:  Unspecified by Maintainer  |      Milestone:  Unspecified by Release Team
   Component:  sugar                      |        Version:  Unspecified                
    Severity:  Unspecified                |       Keywords:  r! dextrose                
Distribution:  Unspecified                |   Status_field:  Unconfirmed                
------------------------------------------+---------------------------------
Changes (by m_anish):

 * cc: dsd, silbe (added)


Comment:

 Replying to [comment:14 bernie]:
 > Replying to [comment:13 tomeu]:
 > > I personally don't care much about it, but I think deployers and QA
 people should be quite concerned about the costs of users being able to
 change the UX significantly and easily. May be better to discuss it now
 and figure out some rules about when to use GConf keys than later having
 to roll back changes that may have proven popular in the field but too
 expensive to support.
 >
 > I agree with your argument, but consider that:
 >
 > 1) we claim that users can freely modify even the code. If they
 currently can't, it's mostly because our UX is incomplete.
 >
 > 2) when given the opportunity, many children are switching to GNOME also
 because of its UI customization options, such as setting a background
 picture or choosing a screensaver. As useless as these things may seem,
 humans of all ages seem to like them, including hackers. (my desktop
 background is all black, I would refuse to use a computer which comes with
 a blue sky over a green grass theme ;-).

 Since this discussion has broadened in concept, should we move over to
 sugar-devel?

 Regarding this particular ticket/patch, these are the points of contention
 -

 1. Don't include CPU usage numbers.
 2. Include CPU numbers, but lower its weight-age in determining the
 'mood'.
 3. Use /proc/loadavg instead of /proc/stat. This way we can compute CPU
 usage instantaneously.

 What do you think reg. the above?

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://bugs.sugarlabs.org/ticket/2141#comment:15>
Sugar Labs <http://sugarlabs.org/>
Sugar Labs bug tracking system