On 1/28/20 12:01 PM, Kenneth Wimer wrote:

...

I'd probably really expect

- To see only disks, when I click on Hard Disks - To go directly to partitions when selecting a disk - To see Volumes when selecting a LV instead of seeing overview

While I agree, this highlights the fact that without more information (use-cases/epics, POC’s, reviews, tests) it is rnearly impossible to create the best solution. Do we look at the larger scope and do this right or do we implement singular feature requests based on over-specific user stories? Even with just this one change there is a lack of user information and/or testing. Waiting for bug reports as “testing” has proven to not be an effective method of understanding our true user-bases’s needs.

Absolutely. And that's the reason why we decided to re-evaluate big topics from time to time. This is a perfect example. We often try to implement things in a way that fits the rest of the tool, but we lack real use-cases anyway. We do have a review, we do have testing, we blog about it, but we mostly get only bugreports as a feedback if at all. So, let's take this as an opportunity. We have learned the hard way :) but we have actually learned something good. - Understanding is the key here - Use-cases are a must - Usability review is a must - Feedback from outside is really appreciated - We should keep blogging, but it's not enough Thx Lukas -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org

On 1/28/20 12:45 PM, Steffen Winterfeldt wrote:

On Tue, 28 Jan 2020, Lukas Ocilka wrote:

...

...

On 1/23/20 3:36 PM, David Díaz wrote:

...

The question is simple, should we really display the "Overview" tab by default? During the planning, it seems to some of us that it is useless most of the time. Taking a disk with three partitions as an example, we think it could be more practical to directly land in the "Partitions" tab.

IMHO, there are two things we can do to improve the UX here. One thing is to remember the last selected tab (David is already working on it), and the second thing is to propose the most suitable landing tab when the user goes to a device for the first time. For that second point I propose something like the following: * For a disk without partition table --> "Overview" tab. * For a disk with partition table -> "Partitions" tab. * For a LVM Volume Group -> always "Logical Volumes" tab. * For a MD RAID without partition table --> "Overview" tab. * For a MD RAID with partition table -> "Partitions" tab.

...

- YaST Disk starts at "Available storage on *" and I never found it any  useful as it contains everything mixed together

Though this was not the original question, this is the one point I would fully agree to.

I don't care much either way whether or not 'Overview' is per default selected.

But rather, I believe a point could be made that the storage UI in general deserves some re-thinking.

The basic concept had been made when the new storage code started and was still quite limited. Meanwhile a lot of functionality has been added and the UI feels, let's say, 'untidy'.

You usually get things done but I more or less just 'click around' until I find the spot where I can do my changes.

And, to get back to the topic: the 'Overview' tab is sticking out beacuse it is visually different from (ok, nearly) all other views that show some kind of table. It just feels wrong when you see it.

So, please no one-shot fix just because someone screemed.

Well, I agree we need to re-think the UI of the Expert Partitioner, but I guess that would be an Epic for SLE-16. Meanwhile, we can do small improvements at the same time we start supporting new features for SLE-15. -- José Iván López González YaST Team at SUSE LINUX GmbH IRC: jilopez -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 09:36, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:

On 2020-01-28 17:46, José Iván López González wrote:

...

[...] Well, I agree we need to re-think the UI of the Expert Partitioner,

I just got a wild idea. What about an UI design contest?

I know people not familiar with YaST development tend to overlook our ncurses limitations and the implications of using libYUI... but maybe we can still get good ideas.

A GSoC project would be another possibility... but I really doubt such thing would success.

The good news is that the logic for fiddling with devices (Y2Storage) is clearly separated from the UI code (Y2Partitioner), so reimplementing only the latter would be doable (unlike with the old yast2-storage).

Any redesign will require new widgets no matter how hard you try with what libyui provides. Whether it be menubar https://github.com/libyui/libyui/issues/158 Or a more functional graph widget https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1096900 Which I would argue we need both for a successful redesign of the module. Arguably both widgets are very possible with both ncurses and qt, they just need to be implemented. I agree bringing in design people would be beneficial, but the question is how much time and resources are you willing to actually put to redesign. LCP [Stasiek] https://lcp.world -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org

On Fri, Jan 31, 2020 at 09:53, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:

On 2020-01-29 10:17, Stasiek Michalski wrote:

...

On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 09:36, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:

...

On 2020-01-28 17:46, José Iván López González wrote:

...

[...] Well, I agree we need to re-think the UI of the Expert Partitioner,

I just got a wild idea. What about an UI design contest?

I know people not familiar with YaST development tend to overlook our ncurses limitations and the implications of using libYUI... but maybe we can still get good ideas.

A GSoC project would be another possibility... but I really doubt such thing would success.

The good news is that the logic for fiddling with devices (Y2Storage) is clearly separated from the UI code (Y2Partitioner), so reimplementing only the latter would be doable (unlike with the old yast2-storage).

Any redesign will require new widgets no matter how hard you try with what libyui provides. Whether it be menubar https://github.com/libyui/libyui/issues/158

I just noticed today the AutoYaST modules has a menu, configured here: https://github.com/yast/yast-autoinstallation/blob/master/src/include/autoin...

I have seen that in the wizard code, it's not particularly portable considering it only works with wizard windows, but I guess it would work in this case. The code seems to indicate this is implemented for libyui-qt and libyui-gtk, but I haven't seen it mentioned in libyui and libyui-ncurses so it might not actually work there? LCP [Stasiek] https://lcp.world -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed, 29 Jan 2020, Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:

BTW, we improved a bit that view in the latest sprint (still not visible in Tumbleweed) so all devices can be managed directly from there thanks to the contextual buttons. See https://github.com/yast/yast-storage-ng/pull/1024

A good example. The system overview page looks *nearly* the same as the hard disk page. But you could do different things in them. Now it looks even more similar button-wise but the table shows slightly different things. And this *slightly* is really annoying. That's what I meant by 'untidy'. A lot of dialogs look quite similar and functionally identical buttons und drop-down menus are 'littered' around the UI. I'm not saying it's outright bad or anything. It just looks like a grown beast that could deserve some new haircut. Steffen -- Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you. (chimp Nim, using sign language) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org