unity-design team mailing list archive

[Jeremy Nickurak <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 16:43, Martin Albisetti <
martin.albisetti@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Jeremy Nickurak wrote:
>
>> I believe strongly that the only things that should show up in the menu
>> should be the things that are *currently running*
>>
>
> Yes, but, it's also uncomfortable to have to go to somewhere else to run
> something you interact with in the messaging menu.
> It becomes a bit of a guessing game on where you have to go to run/open an
> application. I'd expect most users to not really understand the difference
> between running and opening an application.
>

Right. I also wouldn't expect the user to know the difference between a
program that's running and a program that has a launcher by looking at the
messaging menu (at least without it saying "Launch: Evolution", which it
currently doesn't.


> or in the very least are explicitly listed as the ones that should show up
>> as launchers in the menu, either via a whitelist/blacklist preference
>> dialog.
>>
>
> Yes, this may be a good idea so we can guarantee a certain level of sanity
> with our default applications (or the ones we have in our repos).
> I'm not sure if that should be tackled as a whitelist/blacklist approach or
> patches against upstream packages though.
>

This can't be done upstream, and it can't be done automatically in the
package. It depends entirely on which applications the user actually uses.

If I never use Evolution, but another user on the system does, he/she should
see Evolution in his messaging menu. I shouldn't. Given enough applications
with indicator support (which I'm really hoping happens), this is the only
condition in which I think we can call the indicator menu useful.