Re: GNOME 3 from Fedora user's perpective - request for changes

[Olav Vitters <olav vitters nl>]

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 11:58:16AM +0000, JB wrote:
> This is a summary of my posts on Fedora 15 testers list.

It feels like a copy/paste to be honest. We're not Fedora.

[..]
> I expressed dissatisfaction with menu system.
> This is the "window" thru which users (most of them non technical) will access
> your entire Fedora (and later RH Enterprise) product's functionality.
> 
> Fedora, by *edorsing* the above, made a mistake.
> It can be undone (yes, it is a test version of both products, Fedora and
> GNOME 3).

Offtopic for gnome-shell-list. We're not Fedora.

> I find GNOME 3 menu system dysfunctional and an example of inexperience:

As suggested in
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2011-April/098603.html
could you please provide concrete evidence? We're open to feedback, but
that requires more than opinions. We have enough of those :)


> - do not hide main menu (what used to be in GNOME 2) under artificial and
[..]
> - do not split System functionality between System Settings under user icon's
>   menu on the panel and System Tools under Activities - Applications (in
>   particular if you include the former in the latter anyway)
> - do not reinvent/redefine the meanings of computing terms that have been
>   used as a standard for the last 20-30 years by all operating systems and
>   desktop environments.
[..]
> I propose to either:
> 1. go back to GNOME-2-type menu system
>    - restore the GNOME 2 menu system (Applications, System menu structure)
>    - restore the GNOME 2 panel functionality (menu, current windows and
>      discovery of their focus/need-user-attention attribute, top/bottom
>      placement configuration, etc)

Pretty sure that is not going to happen. Feedback is welcome, but what
you're saying is that you really like the old way. I am happy to hear
that, but just try the new way for a while. Then decide if you still
feel the same way. It does take some time to get used to GNOME shell.

> 2. or *at least* offer it as a configurable option

Configurable option won't happen; that'll mean you want something
supported by the GNOME shell developers. But GNOME shell can be fully
customized. You (or anyone) can write an extension which does (almost)
whatever you want. Supported by whomever writes the extension.

> Do it now while you are still in early dev phase, so you can adjust other GUI
> design concepts and elements accordingly.

GNOME shell 3.0 was released yesterday. :)  early dev phase was 1+ year
ago :)

> You will be glad you did it.
> If not IT (support) people then the business end users will force it upon them
> and you. Or they will avoid your products as "geeky" and "unreliable".

Such statements are pretty empty imo without some concrete data. For
instance, I've seen how people interact with the various GNOME shell
interface. People generally either completely hate it, or love it (this
is good btw.. GUADEC Vilanova had a great talk about this).
Seems to be missing some sentences in your arguments. How does a menu
system relate to "unreliable"?

-- 
Regards,
Olav