Re: gnome-shell-list Digest, Vol 32, Issue 51-searching for files

[Brian Baker <brian m baker gmail com>]

I just tested the search function and it works fine for me!
i use synapse and then type search...........wks fine :-)

On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 3:31 PM, <gnome-shell-list-request gnome org> wrote:

Send gnome-shell-list mailing list submissions to
       gnome-shell-list gnome org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
       http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       gnome-shell-list-request gnome org

You can reach the person managing the list at
       gnome-shell-list-owner gnome org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of gnome-shell-list digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: Searching for files (Jeff Sumner)
  2. Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell (Julien Olivier)
  3. Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell (Alessandro Crismani)
  4. Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell (Julien Olivier)
  5. Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell (David Prieto)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 08:47:56 -0400
From: Jeff Sumner <kc4fox gmail com>
To: gnome-shell-list gnome org
Subject: Re: Searching for files
Message-ID: <BF30D9E9-96E8-4B3F-B2F5-4ED4117276D8 gmail com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


On Jun 20, 2011, at 6:17 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:

> On Sun, 2011-06-19 at 20:00 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>>> Where is the global recent document list, please? Is it gone?
>>> I'm running Fedora 15. if there's anything specific to the
>>> implementation of which anyone's aware?
>> On F15 it works fine for me for recently used files. I don't believe a
>> more comprehensive file search is implemented yet -
>
> +1 Recent is working on openSUSE 11.3 GNOME3 install as well.  Only bug
> I see is that it still shows files that have been deleted.
>
>> it's simply not been
>> written, though it's planned. But if I type part of the file name of a
>> text file I recently edited in gedit, it shows up.
>
> I use "Desktop Seach" which brings up the Tracker search application;
> this works *very* well.
>

And I'm back to using the file manager to search- which too works.

I was surprised that there was a "search" feature advertised for Gnome-Shell that didn't actually... Well... "search" my documents.

By the time I get my head around it, I'm sure it'll be there- or someone'll write a plug-in.

Now to figure out how to get printing to my home network printer!

Thanks!

J
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/attachments/20110620/bde696b0/attachment.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:13:09 +0200
From: Julien Olivier <julo42 gmail com>
To: David Prieto <frandavid100 gmail com>
Cc: gnome-shell-list gnome org
Subject: Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell
Message-ID: <1308575592.3581.39.camel@julien>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"


> Email applications and instant messengers should only be a way for you
> to interact with your online presence, that is, you should only need
> them running to send an email or an IM, but not to "listen" to
> incoming emails or IMs. Once you have set your accounts, Gnome should
> start listening for those as soon as you start your PC and notify you
> as soon as any communications arrive, then only launch Evolution or
> Empathy if you actually want to open an interface in order to interact
> with them.
>

This is here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=651347

> As for music players, I love what Ubuntu did: they integrated
> Rhythmbox and Banshee into the sound menu, so that you can keep
> listening to your music without having to keep an open window. If you
> open Banshee and then close it while it's not playing, it will close
> as expected. If you open Banshee, press play and then close the
> window, your music will keep playing even though there is no window.
> You can skip songs or stop the music usin the sound menu.
>

Yes, except that there is no "sound menu" in gnome-shell.

> As for torrent apps and download managers, my opinion is that Gnome
> should have a progress indicator that hosts running operations waiting
> to complete: that is downloads, file operations, disc burning, and so
> on.
>

I agree, but there is not such thing currently in gnome-shell.

> I'm not trying to start a discussion about how convenient these would
> be: my point is only that, in all those situations you mentioned,
> there are alternative solutions to minimizing; it only looks like the
> obvious one because we've been minimizing windows forever, but that
> doesn't mean it's necessarily the best one.
>

No, it sounds right because it is what currently EXISTS in gnome-shell.
The solutions you described before are perfect solutions to this
problem, but none of them currently exist in gnome shell. As a real
current user of gnome shell, I would love to see a solution based on
what's currently already implemented: minimization. When new solutions
are developed, then - and only then - can minimization be declared
obsolete.


> It adds complexity. Some people (take my mom as an example) just can't
> tell the difference between closing a window and minimizing it. When
> they accidentally minimize a window they don't know where it has gone,
> they don't know that now it's in the taskbar. They just don't get the
> concept of a taskbar.
>

If they knew how to launch the application the first time, I guess the
natural reaction to the window disappearing will to try to re-launch it,
which will result in displaying it again. You don't have to understand
the difference between closing and minimizing when things are well
designed.

> To get back to what they were doing, they will repeat the process they
> followed the first time: press the launcher, which will launch a brand
> new window of that application... without all the work they'd done.

Wrong: if the window has been (accidently) minimized, clicking the
launcher icon will just present the "lost" window. See, it's already
working almost perfectly.

>  Other times they will spot the app icon on the taskbar and press it,
> which will take them back to the existing window, but they simply DO
> NOT understand why they sometimes get back their window, and they
> sometimes get a new one.
>

Again, no need to understand it: it will work perfectly whether they
understand it or not.

> This duplicity is, objectively, a problem for some people. I have seen
> it. Removing the minimize button solves the problem for them. I'm not
> saying helping them is worth bothering other users; I'm only saying
> that in some cases, having a minimize button DOES hurt some people.
>

As I already said in another email, to avoid duplicity, just assign the
close button to "minimize" for applications that need it. Then, specify
it in the desktop file.




------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:22:40 +0100
From: Alessandro Crismani <alessandro crismani gmail com>
To: gnome-shell-list gnome org
Subject: Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell
Message-ID: <1308576161.1221.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Il giorno lun, 20/06/2011 alle 15.13 +0200, Julien Olivier ha scritto:
> As I already said in another email, to avoid duplicity, just assign
> the
> close button to "minimize" for applications that need it. Then,
> specify
> it in the desktop file.

No please, I *never* want to minimize apps, specially if they decide
that in their smart way. IMO, changing the close button behaviour
depending on the application will introduce an inconsistency as big as
the whole galaxy, when I press the close button I *want* that window to
be closed and I *expect* that.

It is a no thanks for me.

Alessandro



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 15:26:54 +0200
From: Julien Olivier <julo42 gmail com>
To: Alessandro Crismani <alessandro crismani gmail com>
Cc: gnome-shell-list gnome org
Subject: Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell
Message-ID: <1308576415.3581.42.camel@julien>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

> No please, I *never* want to minimize apps, specially if they decide
> that in their smart way. IMO, changing the close button behaviour
> depending on the application will introduce an inconsistency as big as
> the whole galaxy, when I press the close button I *want* that window to
> be closed and I *expect* that.
>
> It is a no thanks for me.
>

Just a note to say that, even if your point of view is perfectly valid,
there is at least one application that already does that currently:
epiphany, and many apps that do it optionally: rhythmbox, banshee,
transmission... So you can't say that this would introduce an
inconsistency: it would only make it "official".



------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 09:31:19 -0400
From: David Prieto <frandavid100 gmail com>
To: Julien Olivier <julo42 gmail com>
Cc: gnome-shell-list gnome org
Subject: Re: My opinions on Gnome Shell
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=t1EgmvyuX8SJLjwdSuYALyN9_TA mail gmail com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Julien,

This is here: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=651347



> Yes, except that there is no "sound menu" in gnome-shell.
>


>  I agree, but there is not such thing currently in gnome-shell.
>

Obviously. We probably wouldn't be having this discussion if those were
implemented.


>  The solutions you described before are perfect solutions to this problem,
> but none of them currently exist in gnome shell. As a real current user of
> gnome shell, I would love to see a solution based on
> what's currently already implemented: minimization.


Minimization does not exist in gnome shell, at least not as part of the new
workflow. It does exist as a vestigial trace of the old one, a sign of how
things used to work, but it has no place in the way things work now, and I
wouldn't be surprised if the ability to minimize totally disappears in 3.2,
even from the Alt+Space menu.


> When new solutions are developed, then - and only then - can minimization
> be declared obsolete.
>

Quite the opposite. Exposing underlying problems is a vital step to solve
them. Giving prominence to minimization "until a real solution arrives" is,
IMO, sweeping the dirt under the carpet. And it's a great way to make sure
that a real solution never comes.


> If they knew how to launch the application the first time, I guess the
> natural reaction to the window disappearing will to try to re-launch it,
> which will result in displaying it again.
>

That's the case with applications that only have one window, e.g. Totem. Not
with applications that can have multiple windows, e.g. Firefox, for which a
new, empty window is created.


> As I already said in another email, to avoid duplicity, just assign the
> close button to "minimize" for applications that need it. Then, specify it
> in the desktop file.
>

And whose work would that be? Gnome developers? Distributions? Me, my mom?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/attachments/20110620/6a7cd599/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list


End of gnome-shell-list Digest, Vol 32, Issue 51
************************************************