← Back to team overview

unity-design team mailing list archive

Re: complaints


On 31/01/12 15:32, Pedro Bessa wrote:
Firefox goes the add-on way while Ubuntu goes the built-in way.

- you show Mozilla an add-on
- Mozilla can install it
- users can uninstall it
- if Mozilla decides the add-on is good, the add-ons appears in AMO

- you show Canonical a socially-demanding writing of a new feature
- Canonical can't even compile it
- the feature will be forced to all
- if Canonical decides the new feature is good, you write code
- you show Canonical a intelligently-demanding writing of new code
- Canonical can slowly compile it
- the feature will be forced to all
- if Canonical decides the new code is good, Ubuntu has a new feature

Please, go the add-on way.

We been following the add-on path since the beginning of Unity, and although we working to improve this area in the future, take a look at where we are at the moment:

Add-on Indicators
- Lots of custom indicators available that can be installed from the Software Center - See http://askubuntu.com/questions/30334/what-application-indicators-are-available

Add-on lenses
- Lots of custom Lenses will be available in the 12.04 Software Center
- One click to install ;-)

Add-on scopes
- Again lots of custom Scopes will be available in the 12.04 Software Center.

Custom patches
- The most flexible (you can change anything), but most costly (you have to maintain your changes) method. - Basically mini-forks of Unity elements are a great way to experiment with new ideas and features
- Anyone can make whatever adaptations they wish in this way.
- At Canonical we watch these custom patches, experiment and do user testing with them, and if they mature into a good solid additions they will be considered for inclusion.

We also have more projects in the pipline which will feature well defined add-on frameworks. You have to remember that designing and building a extensible add-on frameworks for a feature takes significantly more effort than just building the feature.