Re: irc summary

["Dan Kaminsky" <effugas best com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Jantzen <chris@maybe.net>
To: gnome-gui-list@gnome.org <gnome-gui-list@gnome.org>
Date: Monday, August 03, 1998 1:15 PM
Subject: Re: irc summary


>Dan Kaminsky writes:
> > Well I was surprised by some of the stuff.  Never would have thought the
> > coder division would have been so distraught at the concept of standard
> > interfaces.  I thought pavlov was going to mutiny in there :-)
>
>Don't estimate coder response from an IRC conference. Most coders I
>know hate IRC with a passion. At any rate, the IRC conferences will
>never truly capture the whole target audience. (We are talking World
>Domination <tm> still, right?) Not that they (IRC conferences) are
>wholly bad, or anything.


No, not at all.  It's basically an opportunity to spread the word, to
advertise, and to make sure people don't think we're closing off development
to ourselves.  IRC conferences can be(and the first one was, whether people
here agree to or not):


>[Developers don't want to do SG research, they just wanna write programs.
They'll do
>whatever the style guide says.]

We saw a good amount of disagreement about that in the conference, and those
are from key GNOME programmers.  Pavlov wrote Balsa.

>[Customization is fine if it's easy]

Agreed.  This guide, at least the way I see it, is part orders for app
writers, and part orders for GNOME writers.

>If there is an existing body of applications that conform to a Style
>Guide under Gnome, and the SG is easy to understand, then it will be
>obvious to me what I should do. I agree with Tom and Dan that some
>things should be laid down rigidly as "bugs" if not implemented. I
>should see that all other applications implement these fundamental
>features.

Amen.  Now, the nasty part is figuring out what goes where.  But, as I said
earlier...I give *ZERO* on basic clipboard functionality.  Any GUI that
doesn't do clipboards to a reasonable extent is buggy, period, end of
discussion.

> I should see as a user that I expect my applications to
>behave like that. X, as a desktop environment by itself, has long
>suffered from a confusing lack of rigid standards. The Macintosh's
>primary UI breakthrough was the establishment of rigid Style
>Guidelines. Even, if it doesn't make sense, I can always (esp. in the
>early days) go to File|Exit (or Command-Q) to quit a given
>program. [Forgive minor memory errors, haven't used a Mac in a while.]
>I'm not validating the File argument made here already, I'm just
>saying find any standard and hold to it as the law.


To be fair to those challenging the use of the File menu item, I think it's
*VALID* to challenge it.  I just don't think the challenge is correct.  In
other words, we have the right to break existing traditions, but only when
it's the right thing to do.  I just don't find it to be the right thing to
do to replace the file menu, even if I am alone, and I am gonna keep on
saying it till everybody who is against me becomes coherent enough to
advocate the same alternative with a good amount of detail.  (The arguments
themselves are ~coherent, it's just the proposal that's not)

>But if, for example, I have to jump through
>unholy hoops to implement event playback, then I won't do it. Period.


I'm 100% behind screenplays, since Xlab looks like it does all the work for
everything.  I'm less behind macros, but I'm still hopeful because it looks
like all gnome widgets are gonna get corba'd.

>We have the opportunity to do something to change the world
>here. Let's think beyond our petty differences and the merit of
>current "gee-wiz" effects and look at the bigger picture: The Style
>Guide needs to be a presentation to the Developer of what the User
>expects. In good business, the Customer Is Always Right. In the World
>Domination <tm> perspective, coding is *all* about pleasing the
>Customer. I'm sure this steps on a lot toes in the nascent Linux
>community [of which I've been a part for a number of years], but it is
>a simple fact of life. If the Style Guide suffers because some coders
>complain about loss of control, Gnome *will* suffer. A kite does not
>soar to heights without being held to the ground.


How does this step on toes?  Seems to me Linux is the ONLY OS to please the
customer.

>I am sure that some of my statements here will cause some knee-jerk
>reactions and flames, but I believe that I am speaking for a majority
>of real world programmers here. Think carefully before replying (let
>it sit for a few hours).


I agree with what you're saying, so I'm happy :-)