New KCM UserAccount replaces Email and UserInfo

[Frans Englich]

On Tuesday 10 February 2004 06:46, Aaron J. Seigo wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On February 09, 2004 10:27, Frans Englich wrote:
> > The Email KCM was originally a place solely for email(profiles, tentacles
> > etc.) but have been reduced over time, and this move does it fully - it
> > says: email configuration is best done in the MUA.
> >
> > Except merging the functionality, it thus removes the SMTP server setting
> > and reply to address
>
> a default outgoing email server is somewhat important to automate certain
> services, such as CDDB submissions ... it would be nice to see this remain.

Sure, I'll add.

> the reply-to address can probably be deep-sixed just fine =)
>
> > and some too technical information from the User
> > Account module.
>
> too technical for whom? that information is useful and at _worst_ it would
> be good to have a "More >>" button. the important questions are: does that
> additional information cause consternation and confusion among users? is it
> useful for the helpdesk?

uid, home folder and shell. The username is just as good as uid  identifier 
for help desks, AFAIK. And home folder is a little excessive and most people 
don't even know what a shell is(and those who knows, they already know what 
shell they use).

>
> put below the editable information i don't see what harm it would do,
> though i can see benefits. the kcm is very small, another 4-5 lines of text
> shouldn't hurt.

The kcm is small, but that is just good. Of course, there is one threshold 
which is acceptable and we're currently below it, but that's a plus. We 
should also keep in mind that the lesser we got the more possibilities we 
have for merging etc(and that's relevant since we're trying to reduce 
KControl).
For example, I consider to remove the "Remeber Passwords" in "Security & 
Privacy/Passwords" and move the "Echo Password As" option to the useraccount 
module - there's room.(and poof, there goes another module). What do you 
think?

>
> > The KDM Image/face part in userinfo comes with a set of images. In either
> > case they need to be thoroughly clensed, and this new incarnation have a
> > significant lowered count(many duplicates, too bad quality etc). I will
> > try to hook up an nice artist or something, a uniformed set of penguins
> > would be nice.
>
> KDE is not Linux, but penguins are. it's probably a good move to keep KDE
> and penguins optional and not a standard fare.
>
> > As usual, this needs a thorough review.
> >
> > What do people think?
>
> i find it slightly odd that one's name appears twice: once in large letters
> in a label and once in an editable box. what about just having the editable
> box?

Sure. Thank god for peer review.

>
> as for the username below, i don't think it's at all obvious what that is
> exactly. prefacing it with "Username:" or "Log in:" might help make it
> clearer.

Sure. (I'll put it on a row under the line edits).

>
> the "click on the button" label makes the purpose and function of the icon
> button clearer, though i wonder at it's positioning? 

It should be to the right..?

> hrm... i also question 
> the obviousness of it: what does that icon have to do with my account?
> (yes, it's used in kdm and possibly elsewhere... but i don't think that's
> obvious to a casual user).

Yeah, I pondered on the use of the image too. You could use it in cases where 
it concerns the user, the Wallet, general security/privacy situations, the 
ksmserver logout dialog.
But considering the alternatives, I think the face buttons belongs in that kcm 
best, right now.


Cheers,

		Frans