Re: Having external control panels in System settings

[Petko <pditchev gmail com>]

On 02/06/2012 09:34 PM, Allan Day wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 12:31 PM, Sergey Udaltsov
> <sergey udaltsov gmail com>  wrote:
> > Hi Petko,
> >
> > Just give up. I tried. They want free software with the closed architecture.
> > Paradox. You can do nothing about that . The idea of Gnome OS, the way g-c-c
> > reads it, is to control the UI as much as possible. If the price is
> > extensibility - they are happy for people to pay it.
> >
> > So, give up. Seriously.
> >
> > Sergey
> Sergey, with all due respect, I think you're misinterpreting the
> situation. The best way we can promote Free Software is by making
> products that people want to use. That means making sure that they are
> well designed and provide a good experience. That is the only
> motivation here.
>
> Remember that distros extending the system settings in a haphazard way
> in GNOME 2 resulted in all kinds of pain and seriously undermined the
> user experience. We really need to do better this time around.
>
> We actually want distributors to extend GNOME 3, but we want them to
> do it in a way that doesn't make the system worse for users. There are
> several ways that they can do that. The first and most important is
> through applications. Right now we don't have a great deal of guidance
> on how they can create apps for GNOME 3, and I think that the
> resulting confusion is one factor in this discussion. That's one
> reason why I'm working on a new version of the HIG.
>
> There are also plans to have other integration points within the
> system settings, such as with the privacy and sharing panel [1] and
> with a notifications panel [2].
>
> Allan
>
> [1] https://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing
>
> [2] https://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/Notifications
> --
> IRC:  aday on irc.gnome.org
> Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/

Allan , I respect the effort to make GNOME more desirable for users , 
but we have to accept the fact that there are two polarities to the 
problem and a middle solution should be accepted . The polarities :fully 
configurable/extendible system        and        fully integrated design.

>The first one is more rapidly evolving (since there is more external 
development) but a lot more chaotic and (if it's not properly laid out) 
more inconsistent

>The second one is conservative , unfriendly to external developers 
,but very user friendly and sleek - that is the "no API" way in the case 
of g-c-c .

Now you've chosen the second one , but I believe that's not fully 
correct . When Microsoft chooses that one - yes , they are correct , but 
if GNOME chooses it - I believe not . Why ? Because MS can take the 
manpower to develop a release , make it finished , and handle the 
compatibility issues by themselfs . But an open source community , 
although it has more potential , works not in pulses , but develops in a 
linear fashion , because every developer works more or less at his own 
pace . That means that it'll take a lot more time to complete an 
integrated-design-project ,because by its nature such a project is 
completed when it's 99% completed . While the "bucket of parts" polarity 
works always , and is fully compatible to the open source development .

About GNOME - I like the concept of HIG , that's good . But still I see 
a huge decline in configurability and compatibility , that I don't like 
despite of the better design.
GNOME Control Center (System settings) however is a precedent - it's a 
utility the definition of which is setting up the system . Now , I know 
of the idea to make GNOME OS , but there is none thus far , and you 
can't say that distros will spoil your system - the control center is 
just more or less their territory . You can work with them on 
improvements ,but you cant lock them out ,just because you're not sure 
of their judgement . More so because they get the bad feedback .No 
normal user looks at the computer and says "aah those GNOME people 
messed the control center up" after having installed say Ubuntu , and 
started the System settings from the integrated button in Unity .
  The only people you'll get bad feedback from is in this situation - 
the users that want to know why the hell is there so little settings in 
the control panel , and went off to see who made it to file a bug report 
. The simple questions why doesn't nvidia appear , why doesn't ccsm 
appear , etc. will not get answered with the current system . And please 
don't say - nvidia's third party , we don't use compiz . Apparently 
nvidias CC was in the old G-C-C and apparently maaany people use GNOME 
System settings on compiz systems .

I realize I wrote waay too much but I still feel it's a matter of 
principle and such things shouldn't be left to eat away at the community .

Best regards ,
Petko