[sugar] [PATCH] Log Viewer overhaul.
Tue May 13 12:29:09 EDT 2008
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
<mpgritti at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 4:04 AM, Wade Brainerd <wadetb at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm happy to co-maintain. Eduardo, were you planning to integrate
> > more stuff from Memphis into Log Viewer? I don't want to interfere
> > with that work of course.
> I don't think so. Most of the memphis stuff should be in Analyze
> rather than in the log viewer.
> > Off topic- 'Log Viewer Activity' does not fit in the activity
> > toolbar's title entry. I have seen this problem with other activities
> > as well. Can we consider expanding the default size of this entry, or
> > else dropping the word 'Activity' from the default titles?
> Eben, can/should we drop "Activity" from the toolbar? Double word
> activity will be pretty common I think, since a verb is often not
> enough to describe it properly.
Three points. =)
1. There is currently no reason for the arbitrarily short entry field.
We can (should) definitely expand it.
2. We really should *not* be appending "activity" to the title at all.
In fact, that seems to be the wrong message. If anything, we would
want to append something like "instance" instead. But, that aside,
what I really want is .info support for suggested (and translated)
default titles! I've brought this up before, and again recently in
the ML. Perhaps homunq can add support for this and activity tags
when he plays with the bundle spec?
3. We need to revisit the possibility of abandoning the activity
toolbar itself, in favor of a non-modal (or modal?) title request
alert and a host of features (keep, share, name, tag, etc) within the
palette for the activity in the Frame instead. We could probably do
this along with the new design if we decide it's the right thing to
do. I think we need the alert even if we don't drop the toolbar.
More information about the Sugar-devel