rael at edge
Nov 29, 2009, 12:58 AM
Post #31 of 46
(1125 views)
Permalink
|
Hello!
> Based in your feedback, here are the best solutions in my opinion, let's try
> to reach a good solution that can make both sides happy:
> 1 - Modify the HAM code in order to add some kind of switcher for the CLI
OK. Later...
> 2 - All Cli apps should use the same app icon - Seems good to
I assume we speak of the package icon...?
In principle, yes. However there was already some categorisation (by Andrew?) that showed that not all CL apps are equal. For example if htop installs an desktop icon that automatically starts htop in a temrminal, htop beein a CL app is inrelevant. This we should restict this to apps that neded explicitely and manual start in terminal.
What about the desktop/application starter icon? We could make all this application depend on one CL apps package that offers one icon for all such application. Clicking on it could start an xterm and/or show a list of this apps together with some help text. Alternativly we could make each offer its own icon which behave like above. Having one icon for all would save important space in the starter but might make the user not find the installed app. One icon is better in the sense of "enter dark dungeon area".
> 3 - All CLI app should have a default sentence in his
OK. The purpose must be obvious. It does not need to be exactly one text.
--
Gruß...
Tim
----- Ursprüngliche Mitteilung -----
> Hey,
>
> thanks all for the productive discussion so far, as some know I'm more for
> the con-side, but I really want to have the CLI apps available in a easy
> away, so I think we can reach a intermediate solution here.
>
> Based in your feedback, here are the best solutions in my opinion, let's try
> to reach a good solution that can make both sides happy:
>
> 1 - Modify the HAM code in order to add some kind of switcher for the CLI
> apps - Very good solution IMO, but very hard to accomplish in the short
> term.
>
> 2 - All Cli apps should use the same app icon - Seems good to me, the
> regular users will learn and the power users will be happy to have all these
> apps available.
>
> 3 - All CLI app should have a default sentence in his description, that
> clearly states that the app is only usable from the command line (no icon,
> no GUI) - Most of the users will not read the descriptions, but if they
> complain about it, is their fault because the notice is there :P . A
> similar sentence should be also used in the enablers (OGG support,..).
>
>
> I think 2 & 3 is perfectly doable in the short term and perhaps can make
> both sides happy. Thoughts ?
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Valério Valério
> Maemo Community Council Chair
>
> http://www.valeriovalerio.org
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 10:28 AM, hyartep <hyartep [at] gmail> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 23:24, Valerio Valerio <vdv100 [at] gmail> wrote:
> >
> > > one of the topics of the last community meeting about Extras QA was if
> > > command line applications should be available for regular users through the
> > > application manager or not. We can't reach a consensus, and it seems to
> > > generate very contradictory opinions inside our community.
> >
> > ...
> > >
> > > Please share your opinion, we need to decide about this asap.
> > >
> >
> > I think that apps without GUI should definitely be available the same way
> > as GUI apps.
> >
> > However, there is no problem, to keep them somehow separated, e.g. with
> > special switch in appmanager, in separate repository, or with special name
> > (prefix), so average user understands, they are different from common (GUI)
> > apps.
> >
> > hyartep
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > maemo-community mailing list
> > maemo-community [at] maemo
> > https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
> >
> >
|
