Unity

Bug #882274
Comment #11

Comment 11 for bug 882274

Revision history for this message

Marco Biscaro (marcobiscaro2112) wrote on 2011-10-28: Re: [Bug 882274] Re: Community engagement is broken

#11

Mark,

Em 28-10-2011 08:14, Mark Shuttleworth escreveu:
> We cannot build an interface that supports every conceivable option that
> any given user might want. We simply cannot.
It's truth. We cannot do this. But do you agree that with a "locked" UI
it's much hardier to reach more people? I think customization is the
point. The software needs to adjust itself to the user, not the inverse.

A very factual point: minimize windows when clicking in the launcher
icon. That is bug #733349 (which has 133 affected people and 7 duplicates).

You (design team) simply said "the design and user-interaction
discussion does not agree with this". Two questions:

1. Why? This was not explained. This is the great issue discussed here:
we (community) don't know what are the design concepts and ideas behind
unity. And in situations like this, we simply get a "won't fix" without
aparent reason.

2. Are the features and options for you, design team, or for users? Do
you agree that a bug with 133 people who claim to be affected, with 196
comments and 7 duplicates is a significant thing? But again: all of us
simply got a "no", and not a why.

I understand that you (unity developers) have a lot of bugs to solve and
things to polish that are more important than adding a new feature, but
keep reading...
> Now, if I spent all day defending, explaining, and responding to every
> request, we'd get nothing done.'
Agreed. But I really think we deserve some explanations, and not bugs
closed as "won't fix" and that's it. All you need to do is to write one
or two sentences that explain why it was closed.
> Step back and think for a minute
> about the opportunity in front of us - to bring free software to a much,
> much wider audience.
Ok. I'll do so keeping the bug I cited above in mind (bug #733349).
> Is the thing you're demanding so important that it
> should come before that?
Obviously it's not. But it's a *way* to bring free software to a much
wider audience (customization for those that want it, migration from
other OS made simpler).
> Have you figured out what you can offer in
> exchange? Are you willing to do the work yourself?
>
Yes, I'm ready to do so. At truth, I've already done. It's an option is
cssm, disabled by default, that allows users to enable this
funcionality. But I get a big "no", again, without reason. See
https://code.launchpad.net/~marcobiscaro2112/unity/fixes-733349/+merge/61473

Mark,

Em 28-10-2011 08:14, Mark Shuttleworth escreveu:
> We cannot build an interface that supports every conceivable option that
> any given user might want. We simply cannot.
It's truth. We cannot do this. But do you agree that with a "locked" UI 
it's much hardier to reach more people? I think customization is the 
point. The software needs to adjust itself to the user, not the inverse.

A very factual point: minimize windows when clicking in the launcher 
icon. That is bug #733349 (which has 133 affected people and 7 duplicates).

You (design team) simply said "the design and user-interaction 
discussion does not agree with this". Two questions:

1. Why? This was not explained. This is the great issue discussed here: 
we (community) don't know what are the design concepts and ideas behind 
unity. And in situations like this, we simply get a "won't fix" without 
aparent reason.

2. Are the features and options for you, design team, or for users? Do 
you agree that a bug with 133 people who claim to be affected, with 196 
comments and 7 duplicates is a significant thing? But again: all of us 
simply got a "no", and not a why.

I understand that you (unity developers) have a lot of bugs to solve and 
things to polish that are more important than adding a new feature, but 
keep reading...
> Now, if I spent all day defending, explaining, and responding to every
> request, we'd get nothing done.'
Agreed. But I really think we deserve some explanations, and not bugs 
closed as "won't fix" and that's it. All you need to do is to write one 
or two sentences that explain why it was closed.
> Step back and think for a minute
> about the opportunity in front of us - to bring free software to a much,
> much wider audience.
Ok. I'll do so keeping the bug I cited above in mind (bug #733349).
> Is the thing you're demanding so important that it
> should come before that?
Obviously it's not. But it's a *way* to bring free software to a much 
wider audience (customization for those that want it, migration from 
other OS made simpler).
> Have you figured out what you can offer in
> exchange? Are you willing to do the work yourself?
>
Yes, I'm ready to do so. At truth, I've already done. It's an option is 
cssm, disabled by default, that allows users to enable this 
funcionality. But I get a big "no", again, without reason. See 
https://code.launchpad.net/~marcobiscaro2112/unity/fixes-733349/+merge/61473