Comment 21 for bug 882274

Revision history for this message
Marco Biscaro (marcobiscaro2112) wrote : Re: [Bug 882274] Re: Community engagement is broken

Em 28-10-2011 23:45, Mark Shuttleworth escreveu:
> Yes. But Unity is not locked. There are several options.
There are several options, but almost all of them are related to
appearence. And it's not appearence, but the behaviour, that affects
productivity (again, I can use the example of migration from other
operating system, or even upgrading Ubuntu from GNOME classic to Unity).
> It's a matter
> of debate which options we should have. I'm glad we agree that we should
> not have every possible option, and I trust you can appreciate we are
> unlikely to agree on precisely which options we will have. Therefor, I
> trust you recognise that we will have some specific differences of
> opinion, and that this is normal.
Agreed.
> If you recognise that, you will likely also recognise that we have a
> framework of responsibility in Ubuntu which means we know who is going
> to carry the day when there is a disagreement. In this case, it is me.
Sure.
> In this case, the principle would be that the consequence of an action
> should generally be consistent, unless the action appears to set itself
> up for reversal. So, clicking twice on an icon should generally do one
> thing twice, not one thing then the opposite. In this case, the one
> thing is "show the application".
>
> If the icon changed when you clicked it, for example it got an "on"
> switch, then it might invite you to turn it "off" by clicking again. But
> it doesn't. So clicking the icon should always show the app. Which it does.
Thank you for explaining this (is exactly this what we want: to know the
whys of decisions). This is a very good reason to not use the minimize
behaviour as default. But it isn't a reason to not offer this as an
option, right?
> For users, and we test that with blind testing, not by counting me-too's
> and shouts.
Sorry Mark, but this looks like wrong. If you consider the experience of
10 people in user testing, hundreds of me-too's and requests should mean
something.
> You'll find several comments from me on these bugs. If I have to respond
> with one or two sentences to every commenter, I'll not have time for
> useful work ;-)
Sure. I'm not suggesting you to respond every comment. Instead, you need
to clarify why this will not be implemented (the design principles
behind this), considering the community request.

I really feel that we are often ignored about feature requests that
would increase our productivity using Ubuntu... :( But I understand what
you said about this.
> Customization comes at a cost for those who don't want it. Every option
> adds a cost. Adding all the options everyone wants results in software
> nobody will like. The balance is not going to be liked by everyone too.
> Accept that.
I can't! :) I can't understand the costs of adding an option in these
cases. Could you (or someone else) tell me how the users that don't use
this feature would be affected?
> This is not an option I want to carry in the codebase.
Again, it's a no without a why. :) "I don't want this" doesn't look
reasonable to me. But as you said, you carry the day in these cases.

Thank you.