I like the rb6 mockups, and I much prefer the "play queue" being a source rather than cluttering the main ui. And maybe it would make sense to let users create a new window for the play queue by double clicking on it if they really need to display the play queue and the lib atm. One last thing I don't like is the "play queue" name, I'm not sure "play queue" means much to many people, any alternative idea ? Christophe Le samedi 16 avril 2005 à 14:06 +0200, Michi a écrit : > On 4/16/05, James Livingston <jrl ids org au> wrote: > > On Thu, 2005-04-14 at 21:22 +0200, Michi wrote: > > I like what you've done with the album/artist lists; looks good. > Thx! > > > The information bit looks nice. The various extra sources are something > > that I think definitely should get added sometime. > Thx again! > > > Queue-related comments: > > Originally I though that having the queue show up as another source > > would be good, but after using for a while I'd have to say that having > > it show up as a part of the main interface is much better (at least for > > how I use the queue). > Having the queue always in the main interface would be better, yes... > but I don't see a way it yould fit there without cluttering the > interface. > > > When I use it I normally am adding a few songs, and I'm not sure of the > > order until the end. So what happens in that I drag the songs into > > various places in the queue (not just at the end) and re-order the songs > > as I go. Having the queue just as a source without it being on the > > "sidebar" would mean I'd have to constantly switch back and forth > > between the queue and the library/playlist. > Ok... you're right, I would use the queue differently. I tend to have > A LOT songs in the play queue, because whenever I use such a > functionality (currently I still use xmms's playlist for this...) I > DON'T whant to sit at the computer all the time, reoganizing a short > queue but only have a look from time to time to add some new songs. In > this case, the small queue in the sidebar is not what I want. Anyway, > normally a queue isn't about reordering the item, it's FIFO - exactly > what you want, for example at a party: someone wants to hear a > particular song. You add it to the queue but he has to wait before the > other songs have been played because otherwise, you could just play > from the library. > > Having the queue as a special sidebar item also makes sense because > this way, it acts similar to a playlist - which is good because it is > essentially a special kind of playlist, songs that have been played > will be removed. > > Concerning the interface morphing: yeah, this is generally not very nice but > a) the space is needed > b) the interface already morphs the same way for radio and playlists. > If all the views are designed to match each other this is no big deal > I think. Doing the "open at mouse-over" thing I said earlier and you > shouldn't miss much. > Try running rhythmbox in a resolution below 1024x764. Even at that > resolution you kan only get about 5 items in the current queue (when > cover display is enabled) before you need to start scrolling. Don't > think that this is what people want... > > Having said that, I understand you special use case, just can't think > this is more common. Perhaps the sidebar-based queue could later be > re-implemented as a plugin? Other opinions please =) > > -Michi > _______________________________________________ > rhythmbox-devel mailing list > rhythmbox-devel gnome org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/rhythmbox-devel > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part