Re: GNOME Usability Improvements - Fix the window manager!

On Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 02:58:33AM +0200, Matthias Warkus wrote:
> +++ Thu, Aug 05, 1999 at 02:54:06AM +0200 +++
> Ronald de Man e-mails me. Film at 11. Reply right now, after the break.

> [gnome-ppp]
> > So the novice user reboots to windows.
> (I don't care about that kind of rhetorics, BTW.) What do you want? Do
> you want gnome-ppp to be setuid? It would have got to be audited for
> that, and of course there are already enough setuid programs on an
> average Linux system, the less, the better.

Gnome-ppp could ask the user for the root password first.
Less dangerous than a newbie doing a su and fiddling with files in /etc.

> > > > 	More simplistic mount/unmout of removable media
> > > 
> > > Same question: how much easier do you want it? You can use desktop
> > > icons or the mount applet.
> > 
> > I think some autodetection is possible. And it should be allowed
> > to take floppies out whenever there is no disk activity (I think
> > that's possible when you set nosync in /etc/fstab, but I haven't
> > tried it yet).
> This is not a Gnome issue. 

Maybe not, but it is easier.

> > > > UI:
> > > > 
> > > > 	Ability for normal user to edit menu entries
> > > 
> > > Impossible. The best thing we could do were to copy the entire
> > > system menu over to the home directory and have it edited there. But
> > > then upgrades to the system menu's wouldn't reach you any more.
> > 
> > Of course this is possible. Just copy the directory tree of the system
> > menu, and add entries to the local copy. These entries would override
> > the entries of the system menu. Upgrades will still show up (except
> > for updates of overridden entries). An upgrade that changes the menu
> > tree a lot would make a mess, but such upgrades shouldn't really be
> > needed.
> So, let me recapitulate this: You want to have a copy of the system
> menu tree in every user's home directory. You simply say "shouldn't

Yes. And just the directory structure, not all the .desktop files.

> really be needed" to talk the disadvantage (that the trees could come
> out of sync w/r/t each other) out of the way. And all that just in

It shouldn't be needed to overthrow the whole global system menu
structure of Applications/Games/Graphics/etc.

But should that happen, then there's still no real problem.
For example let's assume that the global Internet menu entry gets
renamed to Networking. If the user has not added any entries to this
menu himself, he wouldn't notice any problems. If the user has
added some entries, then his entry would stay in the Internet menu,
and if that bothers him it's trivial to move it to the new Networking
menu. What's the big deal?

> order to have the user menu entries and system menu entries
> intertwined in one menu hierarchy instead of keeping them separated?

Yes. Why should the user be disallowed to edit his menu? It makes
a whole lot more sense to have all your multimedia apps under one
menu item, instead of having one global multimedia menu, and a
separate user multimedia menu.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]