Personally I was surprised your comments were
not more of the form
"this new thing is not usable" ;-)
I try to keep personal anti-Gnome bias out... :-) and it's still Beta
so I expect some problems still need to be ironed out.
raises an important usability issue... with a totally different
> software maintenance component between Gnome and KDE, there is a major
> impact to documentation, support and the development path.
Hokay, agreed - however this is basically true of all existing Gnome /
KDE differences :-) how do I launch applications ? where is the menu ?
how do I configure the networking ? change the screen size ? etc. So,
agreed - but we're used to this problem in a lot of areas I think.
Agreed, but those tasks are window manager specific. They are an
intrinsic part of the window managers themselves and are generally not
administration level toolsets. YAST is though.... and this is where I
see the issue. The administration toolset (in my view anyway) should
be consistent across all window managers. The administration is not
window manager specific... yet this change makes it so (and would be
the same issue if it was a QT rework that was not available to Gnome
I agree that it would be ideal to expose the
old software installer for
those people that like it & are familiar with it. I'm still a fan of
using the (fixed) new installer by default, since IMHO it is rather
simpler to use.
OK, that works too. This is what was done with the "new" panel menu
thing in KDE, and the very rough equivalent for Gnome. With the panel
menu it's a right click and people are able to switch back and forth.
Granted the change is also possible with the software installer, but
it is well hidden in the sysconfig file, and definitely not something
I want to be walking a new user through while I am talking to them on
It (the sysconfig) is not a change I want to do because the new tool
is different than what I am used to. If the change is an improvement
on the old situation, it's silly to insist on the old broken methods
simply because they are familiar.
understanding the use-cases you have for it. IMHO
installing packages should not require intensive training :-)
I couldn't agree more. This has been a weak point for SUSE for a long
time - compared to say.. Synaptic in Ubuntu which new users seem to
find their way around in quite easily. YAST needs work.. and things
are being done to improve... muchly appreciated :-)
As you point out, this is the case for
~virtually everything except the
package selector; which is unfortunately an oddity here; and I hope we
can provide in parallel the old style tool you're obviously familiar
with for the next release.
Well, I am also fine with major changes as long as they can be close
to equal regardless of window manager. I tried to make this point
clear in my original message, and it is also one expressed by a few
others on the user mailing list (in between the flame warring) that
the admin tool should be as window manager agnostic as is possible.
Theming is nice and an important aspect, but that should not include
major functionality differences. I don't care how I get to YAST (the
path is different in Gnome or KDE) but I expect YAST to be the same in
all window managers.
Take Firefox for example. If you launched Firefox in KDE and got one
set of functionality (I don't mean theming of buttons etc., but
workflow and way of using the browser) and then you start Firefox in
Gnome and it operates totally differently to achieve the same result
(displaying a webpage) you have a problem.. it's no longer Firefox.
caricature: one side rejoices in exposing complexity
to the power user,
and at the other extreme the other would prefer a computer to have just
one button labelled "make money" that can be clicked repeatedly ;-)
I could do with that button.. Do you have a spare one I could borrow
for a couple of days? :-)
In my case anyway, I don't care so much about complexity vs one
button... I, and the users I deal with, need consistency. if it's
complex, then it needs to be complex in all window managers. If it's
one button, then it needs to be one button in all window managers.
Creating a new tool that is window manager specific only serves to
widen the rift between the camps. In this case, assume the Gnome one
works better and has a much better user experience. Then the QT guys
are left in the proverbial cold with a complex and difficult to use
interface... and the wars begin... err or continue. Whereas if the
changes and development can be rolled out in parallel on QT and GTK,
then... wouldn't that strengthen openSUSE's toolset? ie the
underlying tool and workflow is the same and has nice QT of GTK
theming to fit in line with the selected window manager.
Hmmmm... can the new workflow designed around the GTK version be
"turned on" in QT YAST without looking like a GTK applet? If yes, why
wasn't it? If no, why not?
Anyway, I hope this sparks some discussions...
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org