On 09-Apr-2006, Linas Žvirblis wrote: > Eduard Bloch wrote: > >> Window Managers [was:WindowManagers] > >> Modules [was:WindowManagers/Modules] > > > > I cannot see the reason for this change. "Modules" can stand for > > any kind of modules (kernel, X11, software components) however > > this section was explicitely preserved for Window manager related > > modules. > > Yes, but they are only shown if you run a VM they belong to. Being a > user of a VM that uses modules, you can be expected to know what > they are. There seem to be two flawed assumptions here. One is the assumption that only one window manager will be installed on the computer. What if three window managers are installed: - window manager M, which uses its own modules - window manager N, which use sits own modules - window manager L, which has no concept of modules It seems that any modules installed for M would be visible in the menu when using L and N, where they are useless. Another flawed assumption is that the current user is the one who understands what window manager they are using (or even understands what a "window manager" is anyway). For users of computers where some other user installs software that causes menu items to appear under this section, they cannot be expected to know the meaning of a menu section named "Modules". I believe the menu sections should be named so that a user who *never* installs software, nor understands what a window manager is, can still navigate and understand the menu items provided by that software. -- \ "During the Middle Ages, probably one of the biggest mistakes | `\ was not putting on your armor because you were 'just going down | _o__) to the corner.'" -- Jack Handey | Ben Finney <ben@benfinney.id.au>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature