Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 64

Thread: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Beans
    4,267
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Quote Originally Posted by dpjg View Post
    I think the main argument for not hardcoding the whitelist is the following…
    The main reason for not hard-coding the white list is decades of solid research into computer science, programming, business IT, maintenance costs, debugging, and maintainability. In this day-and-age, it is bizarre to see something like that hard-coded — especially when it had been parameterised beforehand.
    Problems with WINE?
    Full Circle Magazine :: Confused "allot"? :: Cheap Linux stickers
    In my day, we had outdoors in which to run, play, and socialise. Now we have computers to do those.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Beans
    1,835
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Would this be why pidgin isn't showing up there after I upgraded to RR this afternoon.?

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Greetings,

    Quote Originally Posted by alphacrucis2 View Post
    Would this be why pidgin isn't showing up there after I upgraded to RR this afternoon.?
    That, Gagim, kopete, Claws-mail and many others. You may feel relieved that many of these already support the Indicator feature but they don't have a Raring release in their PPA or the Raring repository as of yet.
    All of this is just some of the aggravations of testing and nothing to switch to another OS over. It looks to me that quite a few Unity features are being added with this release. Until this glitch I have been well pleased. It is a pain not to know if the messenger is logged in or if there is new mail in the inbox. Time will fix it and time takes time.
    rrnbtter
    Life is good! Live it to the Ubuntu-ist!

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    England
    Beans
    2,698

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Quote Originally Posted by castrojo View Post
    I think you're blowing it out of proportion, a handful of apps can be fixed with relatively little effort. Desktops provide integration points for applications, and those APIs change and update over time. The Dash API changes, the indicator and messaging menus all get minor bumps over time, this is no different than any other software project.

    We've had a concerted effort for the last 3 years (and _two_ LTS releases) to help app authors move their apps over, most of them support it, even closed source applications like Dropbox and Steam. There's always going to be a few apps at the last end of an adoption curve, but luckily by pointing out the new specs to app authors you can help them support it.
    We are not blowing it out of proportion, you are now hard coding something that didn't need to be before. You can't force every app to use it, some apps just don't get updated but are still essential.

    I just don't see a valid reason to remove the ability for users to white-list their own apps when you whitelist hard-code java and wine saying they won't be aware of it, it's just wrong. White listing was for slightly more advanced users anyway so what was the harm in keeping it in? Not like it required much effort to maintain now honestly.

    Like others pointed out other desktops support legacy icons, i think you guys should too.

    I know what i say will fall on deaf ears anyway since i'm just a simple users, but change like this annoys me.

    I just hope that anyone using apps that don't support indictors bug the crap out of the developers to add one in or they risk their app becoming useless.
    Last edited by ELD; February 9th, 2013 at 06:04 PM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Beans
    4,267
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Quote Originally Posted by ELD View Post
    I just hope that anyone using apps that don't support indictors bug the crap out of the developers to add one in or they risk their app becoming useless.
    The problem is that said developers could just as easily turn around and say, "No. Canonical did this, it's Canonical's problem, and Unity is a crap system anyway; why are you using it?" The fact that I love Unity would be irrelevant to the developer.

    This is an unfortunate situation. I shall draft a (polite) email to the developers of the applications that I have found not to work (so far, Keyboard Indicators, ktorrent, TrueCrypt and yad), but I know that in at least two cases, the developers work in their spare time and have little time to make changes just to please Canonical.

    I know it was not meant this way, but to the average user and developer, this looks (from the outside) like an arrogant move, and it is unpleasant. Moving from using parameters (proper programming practice) to using hard-coding (deprecated programming practice since the early 1980's — well, technically even before then) just makes it look worse.
    Problems with WINE?
    Full Circle Magazine :: Confused "allot"? :: Cheap Linux stickers
    In my day, we had outdoors in which to run, play, and socialise. Now we have computers to do those.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Beans
    13,621

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Here's the bug that caused, not all were in agreement (those whose opinion matters that is
    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ayatana-design/+bug/974480

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Hockeytown, MI
    Beans
    561
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Quote Originally Posted by Paddy Landau View Post
    The problem is that said developers could just as easily turn around and say, "No. Canonical did this, it's Canonical's problem, and Unity is a crap system anyway; why are you using it?" The fact that I love Unity would be irrelevant to the developer.
    Plenty of people use Unity, it's in an application author's best interest to work with the default desktop in Ubuntu.

    This is an unfortunate situation. I shall draft a (polite) email to the developers of the applications that I have found not to work (so far, Keyboard Indicators, ktorrent, TrueCrypt and yad), but I know that in at least two cases, the developers work in their spare time and have little time to make changes just to please Canonical.
    This isn't just to "please Canonical." Like I said, please read the specs, having a _consistant_ way to do indicators is a win for users, I'll copy them here:

    Application indicators are more consistent – no more left and right-click inconsistency. Always left click to see the items.

    - Scrubbing – you can click once on an app indicator and scrub left and right through other indicators with your mouse.

    - More accessible – importantly, scrubbing also applies to the keyboard: this means you could bind a key to the indicator applet, hit that key and then use the arrow keys to navigate through all the indicators.

    - Themable panel icons – you can set a specific icon to be a panel icon for an indicator: this should make it easier for creating single colour panel icons for light and dark themes.

    - KDE/GNOME compatibility – KDE applications running in GNOME will have their application notification menus rendered with GTK widgets and vice-versa.

    I know it was not meant this way, but to the average user and developer, this looks (from the outside) like an arrogant move, and it is unpleasant.
    APIs change from time to time, authors are used to it, and we've provided quite a long window for them to add support to apps, and if you look at the number of applications that are supporting appindicators the app developer community have overwhelmingly supported it, other than a few apps that can be fixed.

    Moving from using parameters (proper programming practice) to using hard-coding (deprecated programming practice since the early 1980's — well, technically even before then) just makes it look worse.
    Java and WINE apps will never integrate properly with the desktop, it's been this way since before Unity.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Beans
    4,267
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Quote Originally Posted by mc4man View Post
    Here's the bug that caused, not all were in agreement (those whose opinion matters that is
    https://bugs.launchpad.net/ayatana-design/+bug/974480
    Thank you.

    I have added a comment, which, as you imply, will probably be ignored. But others can add their opinions.
    Problems with WINE?
    Full Circle Magazine :: Confused "allot"? :: Cheap Linux stickers
    In my day, we had outdoors in which to run, play, and socialise. Now we have computers to do those.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Beans
    4,267
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Quote Originally Posted by castrojo View Post
    Plenty of people use Unity, it's in an application author's best interest to work with the default desktop in Ubuntu.
    Yes, I realise all the benefits. We are not arguing with that. What we are upset about is that a freedom has been removed from us, entirely unnecessarily.

    Quote Originally Posted by castrojo View Post
    This isn't just to "please Canonical."
    Sorry; I thought that it was Canonical who introduced these specifications, looking at the links you previously gave. Were these done by the Linux Foundation? If not, who did them?

    Quote Originally Posted by castrojo View Post
    Like I said, please read the specs, having a _consistant_ way to do indicators is a win for users
    Again, not arguing about this! I shall certainly include it in my emails to the developers. But it does not solve the problem — on the contrary, this change has caused new problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by castrojo View Post
    Java and WINE apps will never integrate properly with the desktop, it's been this way since before Unity.
    That is absolutely no reason to hard-code the parameters! If this is how the rest of Unity is run, that may explain (and I don't mean this in a nasty way) why Unity has been so riddled with bugs. Programming absolutely should adhere to standards, including those that have been proven, not only with research but also with the test of time, to work. Hard-coding has been proven to be problematic, and soft-coding to be beneficial.
    Problems with WINE?
    Full Circle Magazine :: Confused "allot"? :: Cheap Linux stickers
    In my day, we had outdoors in which to run, play, and socialise. Now we have computers to do those.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Beans
    4,267
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: New Unity, whitelist disabled = bad

    Mark Shuttleworth has warned me off. So, I shall be withdrawing from the whitelist topic (although I shall continue to follow it).

    If anyone wishes to take over the list and write emails to their developers, please go ahead and do so.
    Problems with WINE?
    Full Circle Magazine :: Confused "allot"? :: Cheap Linux stickers
    In my day, we had outdoors in which to run, play, and socialise. Now we have computers to do those.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •