Re: Module semi-proposal: gnome-shell

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

On Wed, 2009-11-04 at 02:24 +0100, Christian Neumair wrote:

> 2009/11/2 Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>:
> > This should be read as a semi-proposal: at this point I don't think
> > gnome-shell is going to be ready to be shipped as a final component on
> > the 2.30 schedule. But getting it into people's hands is important for
> > having it be ready for GNOME 3.
> 
> Reading some of the responses, major concerns wrt accessibility,
> theming and some other topics regarding "quality control" have been
> raised. I'd like to add another one: All the current desktop
> components (including the panel) have undergone usability studies from
> major companies (Sun etc.) and many individuals. Maybe you could point
> out similar usability studies for the shell?

We haven't done much testing yet, because there's not a whole lot of
point in spending a lot of time and effort to find out things you
already know; a certain level of completion is a necessary prerequisite.

On the other hand, we've done a lot of talking to users, looking at how
users use computers, looking at how other systems interact with users,
etc. These are generally more productive ways to drive innovative design
than detailed usability studies, which mostly give you negative results,
and show you what doesn't work.

We're getting to the point now where we *can* do direct testing of the
shell meaningfully, and I definitely would hope we'll have some initial
results by the end of the year.

> What happens if GNOME shell does not match the desired quality by the
> time of GNOME 3.0, i.e. what is the plan B? Do we delay it? Do we ship
> unfinished software that ruins our image of shipping good software?

We have a range of options, including among other things.

 - Delay further
 - Relabel what we are releasing in a way that sets appropriate 
   expectations.
 - Restrict the scope and remove components to make sure that
   we can deliver the quality we desire

The exact course will have to be picked if and when the situation
arises; I don't think it's possible to plan that out now.

> I am not against changes. I also had some unpublished sketches and
> concepts regarding "the desktop I want" [which IMO should work like a
> personal life planner, i..e datebook + ..., where ... includes files,
> notes, photos, associations with other datebook entries]. It pretty
> much seems to be what you mention with the "Zeitgeist (data colletion)
> engine to collect a rich view of how the user used their computer over
> time". I don't see this kind of data-centric desktop in the GNOME
> shell, so I don't see any new concepts but "just" lots of
> application-centric UI polish. I just want to see good arguments for a
> move to GNOME shell.

There's not much I can say to this but that we really like people
getting involved in design, so publish your unpublished sketches!

- Owen