Re: Freeze break: gnome-shell: clarify confusion with old logged messages

[Matthias Clasen <matthias clasen gmail com>]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com> wrote:
> So, say you were talking to someone last Wednesday in Empathy,
> then they ping you now and you two start talking, you'll see in the
> GNOME Shell notification bubble.
>
>  JD: OK, I'm heading home now
>  me: See you
>  JD: You around?
>                                   Sent at 15:50PM on Monday
>  me: Yep
>  JD: Hey, you interested in getting lunch?
>
> Which is pretty confusing for something that's a headline feature
> of GNOME 3 .... the first message is before the timestamp, and the
> timestamp is the timestamp of right now - there is no indication that
> the old messages are old. This regressed when we added retrieval of
> logged messages, before we'd just display
>
>  JD: You around?
>  me: Yep
>  JD: Hey, you interested in getting lunch?
>
> With no timestamp unless there was a pause in the current conversation.
> What we'd like to see is:
>
>  JD: OK, I'm heading home now
>  me: See you
>                            Sent on Wednesday, March 23
>  JD: You around?
>  me: Yep
>  JD: Hey, you interested in getting lunch?
>
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=645609 has patches that form
> a pretty effective fix for this, two from Jasper St. Pierre, and one
> from me.
>
>  - Impact on string freeze - none - the first two patches don't add
>   strings. The third patch carefully recycles strings from the
>   calendar to avoid adding anything. (Accepting a slightly worse
>   appearance - it will just say "Wednesday, March 23" instead
>   of "Sent on Wednesday, March 23".
>
>   I did a test run of 'make update-po' to make sure no unexpected
>   strings appeared in the .po files.
>
>  - Impact on UI freeze -  My strong assumption is that no marketing
>   materials or docs will have featured screenshots of the confusing
>   appearance described at the beginning of this mail.
>
>  - Stability - patches are all straightforward, no concerns
>   on my part.
>
> So, would like to get these in. (*Almost* done with the series of
> freeze break requests - about two more on my list. Sorry about the
> number here - trying to get as much as possible in before 2.91.3
> and hopefully have nothing or almost nothing for 3.0.0)

+1/2