New devicenotifier moved to kdereview

[Jacopo De Simoi]

On Sunday 04 October 2009 22:31:49 Aaron J. Seigo wrote:

> > > * when an item is expanded, should the background remain painted? it
> > > might make it more evident that the item is "open", and it would also
> > > allow a way to solve the next point, too. (and if the background remains,
> > > perhaps the capacity bar should too?)
> > 
> > The background could  in principle stay, for the capacity bar there is an
> >  issue: there is no way to make a refresh signal "free space changed";
> >  that's why we show it only on hover (and for the same reason it is like
> >  that for kfileplacesitem);
> 
> ah, ok.. unfortunate but sensible (and now i remember the conversation about 
> this a while back on kde-core-devel or kfm-devel as well :). perhaps the 
> action icon (Eject) could remain at least? 
Yes, I don't see any drawback in doing that

> ...
> consider two items, both with multiple actions and both of which have been 
> clicked to expand...
only one Device is allowed to be expanded at the same time; this was made to help the user to keep the notifier tidy and avoid it to grow too much in the vertical direction..
> .. moving from the second action in the first device to the 
> first action in the second device would feel quite "natural" and smooth if the 
> ItemBackground moved between them.
So your idea would be to use the itemBackground in the notifierdialog for closed devices and actions of open devices, and to set another itemBackground for the item if it is opened. 

I'd have to see it in action to understand if I like it; 
the current behaviour intended to instantly communicate to the user that there is a hierarchical structure between categories, devices and actions, that is why each device has (visually) its own itemBackground for actions
 
> * the popup icon only changes when the user will be notified of a device. 
> would it make sense to show an icon change even if the device is going to be 
> ignored? that way there would at least be feedback that the applet was aware 
> there was a change and chose not to do anything about it?
(see later)

> * i really like how the unmounting waiting is shown; i did notice that the 
> icon overlay on a storage volume for mounted matches the action icon to mount 
> a device; but when you click on unmount, the overlay is a box with a line 
> through it. this seems asymmetrical. should the overlay on the storage volume 
> icon be the "unmount" icon?

the icon overlay is an "emblem", which is given to us directly by solid to reflect the state of the device and it is also used, for instance, by KFilePlacesItem and friends;  the "box with a line" is the "unmounted" emblem (thanks Nuno!) which, at least to me, fits quite well the idea of "not accessible". On the other hand the action on the right is, indeed, an action icon (not a state), and the "eject" button fits quite well the idea of "unmounting" (vs "unmounted"). 
 
> would it make sense to show some sort of feedback when a hidden item is 
> plugged in? the popup wouldn't need to show up and a full DeviceItem wouldn't 
> need to be constructed or anything, but perhaps a little "A hidden device was 
> plugged in" entry that could be clicked on to show the device if you wanted 
> that disappears automatically after N seconds?

What about this:
When at least one hidden device is plugged in, there will be a sort of "status label" at the bottom of the widget, below a separator; the label should say something like "%n plugged in devices are currently hidden"; the popup icon should change even when a hidden device is plugged in, with the popup not coming up. 

  --J