The stupid toolbox

[Aaron J. Seigo]

On Tuesday 04 March 2008, Lubos Lunak wrote:
>  I have only one aesthetic issue with the toolbox - it is there. Please fix
> that and I'm pretty sure this whole time-wasting discussion can stop. Even

ah, now we get to the hostage taking part of the conversation: "do what i say 
and nobody gets hurt." let's just not go there, ok?

> if you fix all the usability issues (like that it takes one screen corner,
> even if only by animating when something else is activated using the
> corner), ok, then it will be aesthetics only, but still.

and i bet we even stand a chance of addressing those aesthetics issues, 
provided we (users and develoeprs) identify them and then we (developers) 
work on solutions. the goal is optimal solution, not local maximas.

> And I don't see 
> any other way how you want to fix the fact that on my empty desktop
> background[*] there is something that I consider useless[**] and intrusive.

i understand you think you have the One True Solution. i'm suggesting, as 
kindly as possible, that just maybe you don't. in the meantime, i'd like to 
ask that you take that into consideration and let us actually explore the 
possible solutions to come up with a good solution.

in pursuit of that, it is immaterial the user see any solution, only one 
Perfect Solution or multiple possibilities.

>  And, no, sorry, I'm not interested in testing touch screen support, in

so you eliminate one of a handful of points for your own self. this isn't 
straight down to touch screen. that is just one point.

> fact, I'm not even interested in your vision of the desktop - as a user,

that's fine, too. you don't need to be.

> I'm interested in _mine_. And in my vision of the desktop, there is nothing
> on the desktop.

so, here's how it works:

~ we stop this conversation right now, so i can get back to work
~ someone (probably me) finishes up containment setting and switching
~ someone creates a CustomContainment that lacks a toolbox (by default a 
CustomContainment doesn't have one)
~ you use that containment

see why i don't want to add a configuration option for this? because it's *not 
needed*. it's not rocket science to realize that adding code paths for 
something that has a proper set of solutions that have already been designed 
for from the beginning is stupid.

yeah, i don't expect you to have figured out that the answer is "containment 
switching, of course!" because that requires a deep understanding of the 
inner workings of plasma, which you have already said you're not particularly 
interested in to begin with.

while i don't expect you to have figured the answer out, i do expect you to 
stop arguing with me about it unless you have an understanding of the 
architecture.

i've heard the various pain points. we'll address them one by one as best as 
possible. your role as a user is to communicate what your issues are, and 
that part is done. you could dive in and write that CustomContainment if you 
wish, but i don't expect you to have to do that either.

> Why it's so difficult to explain to you that there's not 
> only the One True Aaron Desktop(TM)? 

because we're having two different conversatons here, Lubos. you are 
perceiving it as a struggle for the "One True Aaron Desktop" and i'm trying 
to explain how the approach to a functioning system is possible and why 
adding configuration options at the drop of a hat impedes that.

i'm not having the "my way" conversation. that's a conversation you are having 
with.. well.. i don't know who. maybe the others who feel similarly. but i'm 
not even involved or engaged in that topic. i don't *care* about that topic.

if you examine both the design and current implementation of plasma, that 
would be completely obvious, actually.

> Do you have an emotional connection to 
> the toolbox that you don't want people let get rid of it even if they don't
> want it, without giving reasons other than "you don't understand it"? I'm

*sigh* look, i've explained the point and purpose of it as well as the 
solutions to your particular problem repeatedly. i've done it on my blog, 
i've done it on this list, i've done with a goat, i've done it in a boat.

i am not here to answer you and the next 100 people when you're asking the 
same question that has already been answered. at some point all i'm able to 
do is throw my hands up, observe that you don't understand it and move on 
with actually writing the code.

when the code is done, you'll probably go "yay! finally!" and move on quietly 
satisfied. and honestly, i can't wait. silence is golden.

> pretty sure I understand my desktop, thank you.

i think that you absolutely understand what you want to be with your desktop 
on your computer.

i think you absolutely don't know how you're going to get there.

if you did, we wouldn't even be having this conversation since everything i've 
said in this email is very, very obvious if you understand the architecture. 
given that "understanding the architecture" is not a realistic expectation 
for me to have of you (nobody can know the internals of every piece of 
software), i'm going to suggest that while you know what you want i have a 
good idea of how to get you there without screwing the rest of the people 
over. in the meantime, chill out.

-- 
Aaron J. Seigo
humru othro a kohnu se
GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA  EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43

KDE core developer sponsored by Trolltech
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/panel-devel/attachments/20080304/b3fb92f6/attachment.pgp