[Sugar-devel] Ad-hoc network UI feedback
dfarning at sugarlabs.org
Fri Aug 21 18:58:31 EDT 2009
On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 4:27 PM, Gary C Martin<gary at garycmartin.com> wrote:
> On 21 Aug 2009, at 21:15, David Farning wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Gary C Martin<gary at garycmartin.com>
>>> Sorry, late to this party, but I've finally got a recent build with
>>> Ad-hoc network support installed on 2 XO's here for testing (no luck with
>>> SoaS-on-XO-1 builds yet, but F11-for-XO-1 build 5 works well). OK... some
>>> quick screen grabs and discussion.
>>> Here's what it currently looks like for an XO:
>>> Hmmm... 2 grey circles... Hovering over both 'grey circles' shows this
>>> 1) Is it a bug that there are 2 'grey circles' showing the same "Create
>>> wireless network" entry?
>>> 2) The empty secondary palette strips feels like a bug, like some text is
>>> missing. Should it be used to show the title describing the palette?
>>> something like "Wireless network\nInactive" would be a good?
>>> 3) Showing grey device icons feels like the old NM bugs we used to get,
>>> IMO is a bit of device icon design flaw going way back. Inactive/disabled
>>> network devices should be just simple white outlines, as per other
>>> when not in use.
>>> 4) Obviously a new icon for when in ad-hoc mode will help, I'll try to
>>> a few mock-ups and see if any work out.
>>> Really great to see we have 'kids under a tree' scenario covered again in
>>> Sugar – big high five for Tomeu! :-) Looks like we might need to try to
>>> some feature dispensation from Mr Release Manager to apply some polish
>>> we are sliding into the feature freeze.
>> We needs to stay away from feature freeze dispensations as much as
> +1, but if no one ever asks for a dispensations (and I most certainly
> haven't yet, as I don't have a formal proposal) then we live in an
> inflexible sausage software factory. All I raised here was the discussion of
> a potential of a change for some svg pixels and a (may be just XO HW) bug
> fix (likely an OLPC deployment issue we would need community feedback on)
> for potentially ~99.9% of our potential upgrading users.
>> Release manager is a hard, thankless job! And Simon is doing a great
>> job at it.
>> If something does not make it this release, it can mature
>> and make it into the next release.
> No question, agreed.
>> The challenge is that in a project like Sugar, the _only_ authority
>> that a release manager has is the trust and respect he or she has
>> earned in prior releases. That respect is earned though successfully
>> balancing that needs of individual developers (and their feature)
>> against the needs of the entire project.
> If a stable 0.86 is never shipped for XO users, then I guess we (or distro)
> avoid ever needing to fix this. I'm just trying to establish where the bug
> is (2x grey icons, Tomeu's screen shots only show 1).
>> Let's keep thinking about how to build the community, work flows, and
>> processes which enable us to double the number of new features we can
>> add each release!
> Apologies if I ruffled feathers and hit a tender spot, but open
> communication is essential to community building, and not reporting feedback
> is so much worse than not bothering.
No ruffled feathers:) But, I am a firm believer in the 'no smiling
before thanksgiving' rule....
More information about the Sugar-devel