On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Joseph Sinclair
<
plug-discussion@stcaz.net> wrote:
>
> I think you misunderstood the thrust of my rant, I probably wasn't as clear as I hoped.
>
> 1) This isn't a Gnome change, it's an Ubuntu change. It affects KDE just as much as it affects Gnome.
> 2) I'm not complaining about the release of updates that don't update anything, although that's generally stupid anyway, it's that if I don't apply EVERY update I get constantly nagged by a blasted full-screen program about an update I don't want and may never apply.
> 4) UI changes may/may not upset people, if they do, then they should be thoughtfully re-evaluated. The purpose of a UI is to make the users' lives easier, not upset them.
> 3 and 5) This isn't about agressive/experimental changes, it's about harming users without cause. All releases have beta periods, and part of the purpose of a beta period, in addition to finding show-stopper bugs, is to get early feedback on UI changes. In this case there was a TON of negative feedback during beta, a user-focused UI team SHOULD pull a feature when that happens and do more UI testing to determine how to address the users' concerns in a clear and effective manner.
> The devs who made the change *ADMIT* that it's half-baked, not necessary, and probably disruptive without reason. WHY would any sane dev team throw out a half-baked change that has a lot of negative feedback in beta? There's no logical reason not to hold it back one release to finish the changes and address users' concerns.
In the case of KDE, I have not seen this behavior. The Kubuntu 9.04
KDE updater is just an icon in the Kicker panel that changes to
indicate updates are needed. Perhaps the Ubuntu devs didn't get their
change into Kubuntu.
Alan
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
(text/plain)