unity-design team mailing list archive

[Petko <pditchev@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 02/08/2012 02:39 PM, Mark Shuttleworth wrote:
> But is it worth it? Saying no to options is an important discipline if 
> you want to contribute here. Saying yes always is an easy route to 
> failure. For a start, if we said that the total number of options had 
> to stay the same or decrease over time, which two options would you 
> remove in order to gain *this* one?
My opinion is - we have to use sanity , and not blind principle ("be 
more minimalistic","be most unbendable and unconfigurable") . I agree 
configurability can harm , but we're talking about a specific subject . 
Since we're on the design discussion - my opinion is that having a list 
with as much as 4 choices is OK . If someone wants to change it they 
must have a few options . It's not confusing ,
> *Some* users know this. Most don't care. Until you understand that, we 
> won't be one the same page at all, and I'll sound like an alien 
> headshrinking cannibal to you. Just saying.
Well I do understand it (although picturing you like that is fun so I 
might stick with it :D ). But again I say - not blind principle , 
instead work every issue out . Here I see no reason to remove the 
options , since even if someone doesn't understand an entry in the list 
- they just won't use it , if they've got to the list once , they can do 
it again ,it's not a change that breaks their system. It's a basic 
responsiveness of living things , a dog can handle an equivalent situation .

Again - not talking in general - I'm talking about the current issue (so 
you're still no headshrinking cannibal)
> No, just making it defunct. It could stay in the repositories if you 
> wanted it there. In universe. Maybe. Remember, /headshrinking alien 
> cannibal/.
defunct: No longer existing or functioning: "the defunct communist 
common market" . I'm not worried though , there's enough people that 
want it , so I guess it ain't going anywhere.

P.S.:sry,for the resend

Petko