Re: [Usability] Gnome's biggest failure. By far. Stone-cold evil.
- From: Dylan McCall <dylanmccall gmail com>
- To: usability gnome org
- Subject: Re: [Usability] Gnome's biggest failure. By far. Stone-cold evil.
- Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 09:47:47 -0700
On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Dokuro<dario soto gmail com> wrote:
> I don't know if there is a widget that holds launcher icons on a
> gnome's (top/bottom) bar, if there is the solution relies in using it,
> that way all the launchers would not be moved from their position on a
> resize (since the hole container is the one being moved), launchers
> that are just added with no special place would have to be all around
> on a resize
> On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Simos
> Xenitellis<simos lists googlemail com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 2:37 PM, Andy
>> Owen<andy-gnome-usability ultra-premium com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 19:08 -0700, Jim March wrote:
>>>> My laptop runs 1280x800 resolution. I just ran an app that seems to
>>>> have re-sized me a lot smaller while it was running - 800x600 at a
>>>> guess. When I came back out, resolution went back to normal but my
>>>> panel is absolutely scrambled to hell and gone.
>>> Is this the bug?
>>> That seems like the closest I can find to it on bugzilla... so if that
>>> isn't it, then a much more constructive way of getting it looked at
>>> would be to create a bug report. Or add any related information to that
>>> bug report, if it is describing the same thing.
>>>> PLEASE, for the love of God, there has to be a fix for this? It's
>>>> intolerable. And after three years that I know of and likely over
>>>> double that with this insane glitch, there's just no excuse.
>>> We all have our own frustrations. Obviously this bug isn't intolerable,
>>> because plenty of people tolerate it (or are like me and don't even
>>> realise it exists). What I would suggest as a better way of getting it
>>> fixed is to take your request to the right people. I don't think the
>>> usability list is a great place for bug reports (e.g. if your mouse
>>> doesn't work, although that is a bit of a usability problem, this list
>>> probably isn't going to be much help).
>>> Bugzilla is the best way to start out. Otherwise, you might be able to
>>> catch a developer on irc and if you are extra nice to them, maybe they
>>> will hear your plea and take some time to fix it for you. But just
>>> remember that this is probably not a bug that affects them, since
>>> otherwise they would have fixed it already.
>>> When I think about the problem, it is somewhat tricky, in that there are
>>> some corner cases which are tough to figure out. For example, what if
>>> your panel is really full, and you bump the resolution down? What if you
>>> change resolution from A to B to C and back to A. Should this return all
>>> your icons to exactly the same spot? What about if you go from A to B,
>>> move an icon, then back to A? Answering these questions comprehensively
>>> is difficult, even if your intuition says that it is obvious.
>> The way to push this forward is to contribute something towards the
>> relevant bug report.
>> A contribution that Jim could make is to describe verbosely what
>> behaviour should be expected
>> for the cases that you describe above. This can initiate discussion,
>> lead to agreement and a developer
>> can take up and implement.
>> I have been hit by this bug as well. It's sadly common when you have
>> dual head configurations,
>> where the size of the external monitor is smaller. When the panel gets
>> crowded, you cannot move it to another
>> screen; there is no free space on the panel so that you drag it
>> around. How can we solve this issue in usability terms?
>> Usability mailing list
>> Usability gnome org
> Usability mailing list
> Usability gnome org
(Sorry for the double message, Dokuro. I miss Evolution...)
The proper, original bug report is here:
In that bug report, a patch for the issue is mentioned. The patch is
at <http://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=51170&action=view>, on
bug #314235. It could use more testing, but it sounds good. It would
be a nice fix to sneak into 2.28 :)
] [Thread Prev