Re: Gnome Boxes freeze break request

[Jakub Steiner <jimmac gmail com>]

Hi Zeeshan,
Thanks for working on this. I've tried the patches and as you say
there are some issues to work out:

- The assistant comes up quite wide. I think the whitespace
constraints that were put in place to make the layout somewhat work in
super wide displays now work against us, making it unnecessary wide. I
am also wondering if the sidebar really gives enough indication of
progress to justify densifying the view. Maybe we would be better off
with a "(step 1 of 5)" or even "(1 of 5)" as a suffix to the title.
Maybe Allan wants to chime in?
http://jimmac.musichall.cz/stuff/too-wide.png

- We end up with a sub optimal dialog within a dialog for when
selecting an image/iso from the filesystem. It's hopefully just a
fallback, so it's not as tragic. The situation sort of repeats itself
in the customization though, trying to be sneaky and closing the
parent modal (and as a sidenote, having the runtime indicators and
force shutdown button is quite unfortunate in this context too). I'm
not sure how time intensive it would be to do the modification either
directly in place or with a revealer+back button (possibly colliding
with the assistant flow. This definitely needs some design time.

- The properties dialog sidebar needs some whitespace love under the
shutdown button... http://jimmac.musichall.cz/stuff/boxes-padding.png

cheers


On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
<zeeshanak gnome org> wrote:
> Hi Andre,
>
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Andre Klapper <ak-47 gmx net> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-08-29 at 02:02 +0100, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote:
> > > While we await the second ack from release-team, I was hoping
> > > I can ask for another break:
> >
> > Please always start a separate thread for a separate request in case you
> > expect me to understand, follow, and even reply to your mail.
> > In exchange and as a sign of appreciation I might try to avoid dropping
> > 15 entirely different bugs in a single Bugzilla ticket about Boxes.
>
> Aye aye, sir!
>
> > > Put wizard & properties in a dialog -
> > > https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=733367
> >
> > Small comment about the patches: I'm not totally happy with the line
> >   "// This file is part of GNOME Boxes. License: LGPLv2+"
> > in the attached patches, but it's not worse than before. IANAL, but IMHO
> > every source file should have a proper header with a copyright and
> > license notice.
>
> That is nothing new. Thats the convention we have always followed in
> Boxes. I tend to follow the general conventions unless I have a good
> reason not to so this is not coming from me. Marc-Andre started the
> project and he made this decision.
>
> Feel free to file a bug about this and we can certainly think about
> changing that for all source files.
>
> > (If .vala files are considered source files.)
>
> What else should they be considered?
>
> > > Designers would love to have this and so would I and Lasse in 3.14
> > > already.
> >
> > Same opinion as Fred: *If* designers have tested this and would like to
> > see it, here is another r-t approval.
>
> As I said, they have not tested this but they do want it. Putting
> Jakub and Allan in CC to give their opinions.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Zeeshan Ali (Khattak)
> ________________________________________
> Befriend GNOME: http://www.gnome.org/friends/



-- 
Jakub Steiner <jimmac gmail com>
http://jimmac.musichall.cz