[Sugar-devel] buddy tags
eben at laptop.org
Mon Aug 3 21:19:17 EDT 2009
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Gary C Martin<gary at garycmartin.com> wrote:
> On 2 Aug 2009, at 15:00, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> Hi Gary (and others),
>> what was decided about buddy tagging?
> No one else has commented yet :-(
I had a brief conversation with Christian about this recently. He said
he'd try to catch up on the thread and maybe give a few comments.
>> Were you interested in working on it?
> Yes, I've just added some new mock-ups (keeping them as simple/achievable as
> possible), so maybe someone else can take a look at them and provide some
I think the settings panel looks like a good start. I wonder if we
should stick with "tags" here, or if it would be worth calling this a
"description" or "things I like" or something similar.
The palette, on the other hand, doesn't work as you've mocked it up.
The primary palette is a fixed height, and only supports single line
primary and secondary titles. I think the tags/description belong in
the secondary palette instead. See
for a related sketch. We've abandoned the gray background, and we
don't have avatars or structured content as shown here, but I think we
could add a "section" to the secondary palette containing this extra
info. It would expand, but the primary palette would always be a fixed
It might also be nice to have the ability to have a button in one's
own palette that links directly to the "about me" section of settings
to change the info. This will also improve discoverability. The
ability to open the settings to a specific section (and even anchored
subsection, perhaps) is something we've wanted to expose in many
places. It might be a nice task for someone looking for a nice
self-contained feature to build.
> Though I'm not sure I have the stamina to get past your code reviews for any
> original coding. It's hard enough to get a bug fix r+ accepted when making a
> minimal tweak to existing code! ;-)
>> From the last Sugar releases tags are broadcasted along the rest of
>> the buddy info when using gabble. Was it decided that we also needed
>> tags in Salut for 0.86? Or it could come in a later stage?
> Not knowing the amount of work involved I can't really make a call. My last
> comment is best I can make:
> "Well ejabberd was definitely the first to have solved as it represents a
> solution for a more dispersed community, less likely to know about the
> others. But having both [gabble + salut] would obviously be much more
> consistent.– If you told me 'journal grid view' won't happen, or tool bar
> 'stop' always visible won't happen, or 'ad-hoc wirless networks' won't
> happen, or 'tags under Journal titles' won't happen, or 'Metacity layering
> issue will persist',– then I'd say let salut slip to 0.88."
I agree. I think I'd sooner have basic buddy self-tagging working in
both scenarios than have tagging of others (pseudo groups) in one or
the other, though.
> I was also hoping to get some feedback on the first boot experience if
> anyone has a strong opinion:
> "I really do like the simple 'first' boot experience, pick colours, enter
> name, and your are done! Great! What do folks think about exposing an
> optional self tag prompt at this point? Wording is going to be tough, and
> would likely need some prompting example tags. As a challenge, feel free to
> reply with some single word tag lists you might assign to yourself..."
I'm not sure it's necessary to do this. the more streamlined this
process is (and the less description/guidance needed) the better. I
think that adding this info could be part of a first day lesson, if
it's something that instructors wanted to emphasize.
More information about the Sugar-devel