On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 07:21:14AM -0400, Ben Armstrong wrote: > > Think, for example, of the ability to choose a different DM or WM from > the gdm or kdm greeter when a user logs in. Why shouldn't it be > possible to also select a completely different set of menus and desktop > layout? For example, let's say I work from home. I would like to have > a desktop layout for work and one for play and relaxation. My work > layout has everything I use in my work at my fingertips. My play layout > is quite different, putting more recreational things within easy reach. well, I think that is totally doable. and easily. see my wiki post about setting up a session for a very small child. This same sort of thing would work for a regular user. Creating different config files for different [tofiles for the same user. The Exec= line in a .desktop file can carry options for different configs for the wm to pull in a different setup. should be very straightforward. > > > my whole idea is to make it beyond simple to setup a login for your > > child. Messing around with groups is not how I view this being > > done. > > Exactly! Let's leave the "messing around" to the children. Groups are > far too rigid. to a point I agree. The stuff about letting a child create their own environment is great, but I don't want, my child to be able to elevate their own world to the next level without my input. I'm not sure why, but tis the way I feel. But here is a good example. My 7 year old doesn't need more than one video player -- totem is plenty. My 9 year old could probably handle the more complicated configuration options (and the access to those options as well) of xine or mplayer. It is very possible for the 7 year old to break their local configs of mplayer or xine to the point where it doesn't work for her at all and is probably not recoverable without intervention anyway. I know I"m rambling but the point is, a certain amount of discoverability is great, but I want to have control over when the child moves up to the next level of sophisticated system. > > > I've thought on this a bit and don't really have any good > > solutions. I think the biggest issue is less how to implement > > configuration but what those configurations should be with the idea > > that the details of how to implement them will fall out naturally > > (wishful thinking I know). There are several issues that have to be > > dealt with, not the least of which is *changing* some child's > > configuration when they've become frustrated/too old for the current > > config. > > Yes. And the easier it is for children to make such changes for > themselves, the better. ah, okay. I think we're talking about different things. I'm more than happy to have my kids mess around with different themes, background images, screen resolutions, whatever. I'm concerned about them getting access to software that will scare them away or break something or just confuse them. > > > I see setting up a script that tweaks all the configs for a > > user to fit a particular age group. Later a nice front-end could be > > tacked on to the thing to make click-scroll mom happy. > > I really think something a whole lot simpler would work. If the > smarts for such "profile" configs are *in the Debian system* then any > package that is "profile-aware" could provide different default configs > per age range. Then logging in with a different profile should be > doable in a very user-friendly way (e.g. a choice at the gdm or kdm > greeter). So no new front-end is needed, just tweaks to the existing > ones. a profile-awareness thing would be cool. so packages can set their own sort of "Age-level" parameter and then if you have an age-level aware config option set somewhere then the menus would show or not show that particular package? A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature