Re: [gdm-list] GDM trunk will be used for GNOME 2.24.

[Brian Cameron <Brian Cameron Sun COM>]

Gil:

> Just thinking about it ...
>
> Wouldn't it be reasonable to enable everything the first time the user
> logs in and the if no accessible technology has been used ask if they
> have to be turned off by default (and with a little explain about how to
> re-enable them)?

From a usability standpoint, starting GDM with the magnifier by default
would probably make it hard to use for people who don't need to use
the magnifier.

Also, this sort of solution wouldn't work well in situations where
multiple users use the same machine.  Some users may need AT programs
while other users may not.  So, it would be problematic if the first
user said "No, I don't need them", and messed up the login process for
the next user who does.

Brian


> El dl 22 de 09 de 2008 a les 10:31 -0700, en/na Peter Korn va escriure:
> > Brian, all,
> >
> > Do we have a "chicken-and-egg" situation here?  Why do all that is 
> > necessary in GDM if we don't yet feel that accessibility on the desktop 
> > is sufficiently stable to have it on by default from the GNOME 
> > community? (so goes one argument)  At the same time, if we aren't quite 
> > there yet in login, then we need system administration help to set up 
> > the initial login, so we can have system administration help to turn it 
> > on at the desktop (and leave that problem unfixed until later).  
> > Lather-rinse-repeat.
> >
> > Meanwhile some distros are leapfrogging GNOME & the core community that 
> > introduced accessibility and made it a core value by enabling users to 
> > turn accessibility on with a gesture in their LiveCD, and then the 
> > installation process turns it on for that user on the desktop.  But this 
> > is a hack.  And users don't have the experience of full and independent 
> > accessibility in GNOME; they rather instead have it (and have it 
> > differently) in some distros.
> >
> > We should fix this.  And component by component, we shouldn't play a 
> > game of chicken, insisting that some other component fix it first.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Peter Korn
> > Accessibility Architect & Principal Engineer,
> > Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> >
> >
> > > Will:
> > >
> > > > While I disagree with Brian's assessment (I think he tends to lean 
> > > > more to the 'it's OK as long as an able-bodied sysadmin can configure 
> > > > the system for the disabled user' side than the 'let the user be 
> > > > independent' side), I'll support the decision nonetheless.
> > > I agree with you that "let the user be independent" is best.  However,
> > > I was just highlighting that GDM's a11y has never matured to the point
> > > where it was turned on by default (much like the situation with the rest
> > > of GNOME not having a11y turned on by default).
> > >
> > > Therefore, I was just highlighting that the new GDM is pretty much
> > > as good as the old GDM in terms of a11y.  The main area of regression
> > > is that you can not launch a11y on-demand when a11y is turned on.
> > >
> > > The ability to launch a11y on demand is really only useful if the
> > > GNOME desktop also supports this feature (which it currently doesn't).
> > > Being able to navigate the login screen independently is not very
> > > useful if you still need someone to help you set up your user
> > > session.  Another use case where the "on-demand launching" feature is
> > > useful is in terminal server situations where many users may be
> > > sharing the same server.  However, the new GDM doesn't support that
> > > anyway, and the release team seems okay with that.  So I don't think
> > > these a11y issues are a real blocker.
> > >
> > > This is why the long term goal is to make a11y "on-demand" launching
> > > a part of gnome-settings-daemon so it works the same in both GDM and
> > > the user session.  Then I think we will have gotten to the point where
> > > we all have been pushing to get.
> > >
> > > Brian
> > >
> > >
> > > > Vincent Untz wrote:
> > > > > Le lundi 22 septembre 2008, à 09:46 -0400, Matthias Clasen a écrit :
> > > > > > On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Andre Klapper <ak-47 gmx net> wrote:
> > > > > > > The release-team is going to use gdm trunk for GNOME 2.24.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Note that most release-team members have mixed feelings.
> > > > > > > Entire discussion would have been less frustrating if gdm 
> > > > > > > developers had
> > > > > > > been more responsible to the concerns shared in discussions. Maybe 
> > > > > > > just
> > > > > > > my point of view.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Translations of gdm trunk are in a good shape.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Distributors: Old gdm is still available in case you hit a 
> > > > > > > regression.
> > > > > > I'm surprised by this turn of events, after Vincent decreed that we'd
> > > > > > go with 2.20 on Friday...
> > > > > See
> > > > > http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2008-September/msg00251.html 
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Vincent
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > gdm-list mailing list
> > > > gdm-list gnome org
> > > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gdm-list
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > desktop-devel-list mailing list
> > > desktop-devel-list gnome org
> > > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
> > _______________________________________________
> > gnome-i18n mailing list
> > gnome-i18n gnome org
> > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n