Re: Status of background capplet?

[Glynn Foster <Glynn Foster Sun COM>]

Hi,

On Sun, 2006-02-26 at 19:20 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> Sounds like you're already aware of the background capplet status. 
> Sorry, but if you dislike the new wording you'll need to patch. 
> Hopefully the problems discovered in Novell user testing (which this
> wording change was a fix for) can be investigated further along with
> this inconsistency among dialogs in order to try to discover how to
> fix this inconsistency in 2.16.

Well, what I observed from various mailing lists was that there was
pretty strong disagreement with what happened - and ever stronger
disagreement from a timing point of view.

It's regrettable, but I'll almost certainly be patching JDS to be
consistent with the rest of the dialogs until upstream brings more
consistency. I'm not totally against the idea of 'Finish', just in the
rather haphazard approach that has been taken [1]. I'd rather thought
the project was more grown up than that.


Glynn

[1] If you were so certain of the fix, then it would have been done at
    the start of the release cycle to benefit from user testing among
    other things.