unity-design team mailing list archive

[Jeremy Nickurak <jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

What about rhythmox content sharing?

If rhythmbox is sharing content via one of its plugins, when you close it,
you don't want it to go a way... you want it to be a background service.
Closing the window expecting it to still be sharing is a gap here.

This would seem to be a good reason to say that the connection between
closing a window and exiting a window is probably too complex to get
right.... even if you get it right, the users won't understand the logic of
what's happening.

For consistency sake, closing the rhythmbox window should either ALWAYS keep
the service running in the bg, or ALWAYS kill the service... and I'd suggest
the former is safer. If it's not actually getting used in any way, it should
be getting swapped out to disk, brought back into memory when it's required
(either as a result of local or remote user action).

On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 11:09, David Hamm <davidthamm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I think this handles the issues very cleanly and elegantly.
> -without a doubt
>
> Rhythmbox able to restore its previous state upon launch and all the
> other nuances would truly make it organic, to complete that piece
> though, either remove the minimize or close button. The later, keep in
> mind, would associate this functionality with other applications
> however - which might be good.
>
> Put another way, with the system-tray functionality there is no longer
> a need for Rhythmbox to be in the tray. Hence there is no need for
> both a minimize and close.
>
> Doing so would clearly state Ubuntu as heading tword a more android or
> user oriented like platform.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> Post to     : ayatana@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ayatana
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>



-- 
Jeremy Nickurak -= Email/XMPP: jeremy@xxxxxxxxxxx =-