Re: Blends pages, tasks pages etc.
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:12:17PM +0100, Ole Streicher wrote:
> > I agree that there is possibly room for enhancement on the tasks pages
> > but for my taste these suggestions sound a bit complex to me for a
> > reason that was not brought up before by anybody dealing with the tasks
> > pages.
> Is it that complicated?
Probably not - but I was not talking about how hard something is to
> function: if the URL has a "#all" appended, open all details that were
> hidden before. Even for me with limited JS experience this looks quite
> simple, or do I miss something important here?
> Maybe the reason that the tasks pages were not discussed before is that
> it is not clear what they are made for: Are they mainly for our *users*
> to help them finding out more for a specific blend, or are they mainly
> for us *developers* who want to have a nice overview on different
> aspects of our blend?
Well, I try to make users become "developers" in a sense that they
provide translations, debtags and so on. A part of Blends devlopers are
also users. So the distinction into two groups users on one side and
developers on the other side is sometimes hard.
Moreover I can't see why it should be in the interest of users to
hide descriptions an screenshots per default.
> I tend quite clearly to the first and see them as an advocacy for my
> blend -- so that they should be so simple that anyone knowing nothing
> about the specifics of Debian can find out what he gets when he installs
> "debian-astro". This means to hide everything that is too specific, and
> present everything else clearly.
I asked *several* users and they like the pages as they are. I have
no idea about astronomy users.
> > I agree that adapting to a corporate design could be nice. However, the
> > colors (green, yellow and red) have some generic meaning and I think
> > these color scheme needs to be kept.
> It depends IMO where: for developer pages (thermometer etc.), yes
> (altough I don't like them personally). However for the task lists, they
> seem redundant for me: The page is anyway split by the section, and
> each section has a defined color, I don't see a benefit.
If you have a long list its good to know where you are. I agree that
there is some redundancy. I think the yellow - green change if "there
is some work to do" (versions, debtags) should be kept.
> Especially when
> the whole page gets much shorter (because of only one line per package),
> the color is not needed to keep the overview.
I'd like to repeat that I do not see any advantage for a default display
with one liners.
> > I'm not sure what you mean by this.
> We could try to implement the pieces that you still miss in my proposal
> by keeping the Debian Design there (this is basically an implementation
> of the "#all" flag, right?).
I'd be interested in seeing this to enable evaluation and hearing
> Or we could just keep two lists: the current one, for developers, and a
> new one for the users. Since I would think that the users page is the
> first (and default) to be presented, the existing one would be the
> "shadow" one, accessible f.e. from the developers page of the blend.
I repeat: I see no evidence that users are served better with one
liners. Please backup your statement by some arguments.
> (We also don't need to have the same solution for all blends).
Yes, for sure each Blend is free to pick options that are considered
useful by the Blends developers.
Kind regards and thanks for your creative input