extragear/multimedia/amarok/src

[Lydia Pintscher]

On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 7:40 PM, Orville Bennett <illogical1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hmmmmm,
>> not a big fan of this one! Why was this not discussed on the list?
> Because I got lazy.
>>
>> How broken is it currently on OS X?
> 1. The main window does not resize. You get the default size (based on
> your screen resolution) or fullscreen (if you maximize).

Bad. But not TechPreview material imho. Beta!

> 2. Currently the web services don't work. This might be fixable by
> switching to the xine engine, I haven't had time to test yet.

Ewwwwwww. None of them? _That_ is bad because it is our #1 selling
point. This needs to be fixed asap.
If you don't have the time someone else should help you test this.

> 3. The /Volumes directory is sometimes missing. This makes accessing
> external hard drives or UMS mounted media players inaccessible.

Problematic. Any idea why this is happening? Anything other Mac users
can do to help investigate?

> 4. It unfinished with the Qt mac style.
> It looks like someone took a dump and put lipstick on it with the KDE
> oxygen style. In short, the UI needs _a lot_ of work.

Screenshots please. But I vote Beta here as well. Looks don't justify
TechPreview.

> 5. On every launch after the first the screen becomes hidden. New
> users are highly unlikely to figure out.

Ideas? Ways to investigate?

> 6. Actually promoting this as a release when it's clearly unfinished
> will result in FAIL of epic proportions.

Again for the future: I and everyone else in the team need to know
about this. I don't have a Mac to test this. Same for Windows. I
depend on feedback I get from those who actually do. All of the above
needs to be communicated clearly in our messaging from release notes
to mailinglist and forum postings.
And as long as noone knows about those problems they are not going to
get fixed. I understand that you don't have the time to fix all this
on your own. And you shouldn't need to.

> 7. Expecting the target audience to compile amarok 2 on os x is
> ludicrous and my packages suck so bad even I don't want to use them.

Ok expecting them to compile it themself is of course a no-go. How are
we going to improve the packages? RangerRick? Wait for someone else to
step up and help you?

> 8. kded starts and registers global shortcuts. This can wreak havoc
> with some programs. It drives _me_ absolutely crazy when I'm using
> Terminal.app.

Hmmm. Can you explain a little more in detail?

> 9. I just don't think it's ready and I'd like to avoid a KDE 4.0 style
> release for amarok on OSX.

We all do, trust me ;-)
Question is how we do this. Obviously there are major problems. But
compared to the real TechPreview we released all this sounded okish to
me so far.
And some of those problems I weren't even aware of.

>> Does any of this justify calling
>> it a TechPreview after marketing it as beta for quite some time?
> #1 all by itself does. The nails're already in the coffin, the rest
> are additional clamps ensuring it remains sealed.
>>
>> Guys, if there are major problems I need to know about them! And I
>> need to know about them _now_.
> See above! :-)

Just to make this clear: We need to get our messaging about this
right. I am questioning if TechPreview is the right name to call it.
We are going to make it very clear in the release notes and other
messages that Mac and Windows packages will have more problems than
the Linux version. But giving it 3 different names on 3 different
platforms is a really really bad idea imho. The only problem that
justifies calling it TechPreview is #2. Fixing that should be a
priority. Once that is fixed I think the other problems justify a Beta
compared to our other releases so far.
Suggestions? Comments?


Cheers
Lydia

-- 
Lydia Pintscher
Amarok community manager
kde.org - amarok.kde.org - kubuntu.org
claimid.com/nightrose