[Compcomm] My ideas (for the record)

[Mike Dransfield]

Alyssa Hung wrote:
> Danny Baumann wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>>     
>>>> ACK in principle, but there's always the risk that we "discuss things to
>>>> death" (such as the project name...) and in the end nothing will be
>>>> done. I'm not saying that this will happen everytime something is
>>>> discussed, but we should not forget that risk.
>>>>   
>>>>         
>>> We need to at least know what the issues are, coming up
>>> with nothing IMHO is better than coming up with 2 competing
>>> solutions that each dont really fill everyones needs.
>>>       
>> Ok, that's something we disagree in then. I think it's better to come up
>> with a solution that fills the needs of the vast majority than with no
>> solution.
>>     
>
> Indeed. Many, many users are grateful for having access to tools that 
> make the mystique of configuration comprehensible to them. Many, many 
> users also appreciate having access to plugins that are CLOSE ENOUGH to 
> do what they wish, even if there are technical limitations that can only 
> be properly addressed at a much later time.
>   

This is my problem, it is not necessary to design a different
configuration system just to have a user friendly GUI.

Users do not understand this distinction so when they hear
about people saying libbs is crap then they hear 'gui tool is
crap', thats not the case at all.

I am fairly sure we have been saying this for a long time.

> I loved the Beryl project for offering usable solutions NOW even if they 
> aren't perfect or even sustainable solutions. I'm certain that I'm not 
> alone in that sentiment.
>   

This does not make sense at all.  The backend was already
ready.  This is a case where it would actually be faster AND
produce a better result to use dbus for communication.

Have a look at compiz-settings.  IMHO it was way better than
anything else I have seen so far.  It took a fraction of the time
to produce libbs/ccsp/ppsc-settings etc etc.

The side effect of using the proper methods is that everyone
will be able to use it, not just the small few who install all the
dependencies and change their start script.

Other features can still be added NOW, nobody said you cannot
do that.  Everything can be done with plugins so do whatever
you like.

>   
>>> I think that grouping people based on what cult they belong to
>>> is very damaging and segregates things on grounds which
>>> make no sense to the average user.
>>>       
>> ACK (besides of the wording :-P )
>>     
>
> Not cult. Culture. ;) Some of us users feel threatened by the notion 
> that we'll have to change, maybe change a lot (our posting habits, 
> expectations of the sorts of responses we will receive, etiquette, ways 
> of eliciting meaningful responses, verboten subjects, dress codes, 
> etc.), to integrate well into the Compiz society. Please show me that 
> these fears are unjustified.
>   

Who said you had to change any of those?

The whole point of these discussions is so that we can
find a way to accomodate everyone in one place working
towards common goals (or something like that).

The only rule would be post in the right category, but I
think you have that rule on all forums.

>
>
> ~Alyssa
> _______________________________________________
> CompComm mailing list
> CompComm at Rock3d.org
> http://www.ubaight.com/mailman/listinfo/compcomm
>