----- Original Message -----
> On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 09:54 -0400, Vitezslav Humpa wrote:
> > The way KDE application launcher handles this also provides nice
> > example for a design solution to this problem. They use a
> > "Generic" (e.g. Terminal) field to describe the application
> > primarily
> > and have the name of the actual binary (e.g. Konsole) present in
> > small
> > letters when the generic name is not unique.
> I happen to think this is the wrong way round. For someone who's not
> sure what they want, it might be marginally better, but for anyone who
> already knows, i.e. for most people most of the time after learning
> it just produces a momentary hesitation every time you use it.
> For example, I have *never* thought to myself "Oh, I need to fire up
> Groupware Suite". I just look for Evolution, but it's in small letters
> in a grey font. Much better would be to have Evolution as the main
> item, with Groupware Suite in a small grey font for those who don't
> what it is (think of it as a poor man's ToolTip).
> There's a difference between easy to use and easy to learn. We would
> well to favour the former over the latter whenever there's a conflict.
Are you referring to a situation in KDE(can't boot it now to check)?
Seems to me that most of the times we do use the application's actual
name in the menus. With few exceptions that form the base of this whole
The Fedora design team had a meeting today for Fedora 16 planning and
we'd like to try for a four-wallpaper pack for Fedora 16. (We can
provide a slideshow XML file for GNOME, if KDE / XFCE / LXDE support
something like slideshows let us know and we can try to provide it).
We wanted to provide a heads up so that you could account for the space
early on in the cycle if you wanted all of the wallpapers for your spin;
in the past when we've done a slideshow set it has caused last-minute
space issues: we'd very much like to avoid that.
Based on previous wallpapers and the high resolution we are targeting,
6-8 MB is probably a good guesstimate of the maximum amount of space we
might need. In the end, we may need to pull back and focus on really
polishing only one of the wallpapers; as the release progresses we can
keep you updated on what to expect.
If you're interested in following the artwork progress, we have an
artboard here: http://publictest04.fedoraproject.org/artboard/
Is this okay?
(As a favor to me, I'd appreciate it very much if you could keep me on
the CC of replies :) )
I have 5 virtual desktops and sometimes they all have things on them
and sometimes not.
I have defined move one desktop right and move one desktop left to
cntrl-alt-rightarrow and cntrl-alt-leftarropw respectively.
This works fine, in that I move from desktop to desktop, whether or
not there's anything in them.
until suddenly it doesn't work anymore - I can only move between the
first 3 that are populated.
If I click on desktop 4 in the pager I can go there, but
cntrl-alt-arrow only moves me between 4 and 5, not back to 3 or 2 or
If I run a program in desktop 4 that doesn't change the behaviour, I
can only go from 4 to 5 and back by keystroke, or between 3,2,1 by
If I right click on the pager, go to pager settings, change the number
of desktops, then right click again, go to pager, change back to 5,
all is OK and things work as I expect.
I haven't been able to work out what triggers this behaviour, doesn't
seem to be the starting of any program as such.
This is a report of the weekly KDE-SIG-Meeting with a summary of the
topics that were discussed. If you want to add a comment please reply
to this email or add it to the related meeting page.
= Weekly KDE Summary =
Time: 2011-06-07 15:00 UTC
Meeting page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/Meetings/2011-06-07
Meeting minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-06-07/kde-
Meeting log: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2011-06-07/kde-
= Participants =
* Kevin Kofler
* Jaroslav Reznik
* Radek Novacek
* Than Ngo
* Red Dieter
* Thomas Janssen
= Agenda =
* 4.7 packaging status
* 4.6.4 status
* Lohit fonts accidentally disable the bytecode interpreter for Qt patch 
== Summary ==
* kde 4.6.4 commited to fedora git, kdelibs, kdebase*, kde-l10n are already
* ACTION: rdieter_work to re-enable dist-f14-kde koji target
* Kevin_Kofler reports missing some .cmake files in kdeedu
* ACTION: than_home to take a look at 4.6.4 kdeedu issues
* rhbz#509645 should be marked as fixed in 4.6.4 update (if not pushed as 4.6.3
4.6.80 aka 4.7 beta1 status
* upstream decided to split packages (now kdeedu, kdegraphics, kdebindings
completely + partially other packages)
* kde 4.6.80 commited to fedora git, kdelibs, kdebase* are already built
** using multisources hacks
* kdeedu splits are final - we try to make the split by F16
Lohit fonts accidentally disable the bytecode interpreter for Qt patch
* Behdad provided a patch to Qt's fontconfig code
* ACTION: than_home to rebuild Qt with the patch soon to test
= Next Meeting =
= Links =
Jaroslav Řezník <jreznik(a)redhat.com>
Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno
Office: +420 532 294 275
Mobile: +420 602 797 774
Red Hat, Inc. http://cz.redhat.com/
> I agree, this is a good starting point. I don't really see the point
> of the popups,
> but if other folks think they're necessary, I won't argue.
Wouldn't have to be popups. Actually they are used now to provide a
textual description of what the application does, e.g. for "Brasero
Disk Burner" -> "Create and copy CDs and DVDs", which just seem better
than having "Brasero Disk Burner" -> "Brasero". This unfortunately
doesn't provide for the distinguishment we seek, e.g. in example of two
terminals the popups are: "Terminal emulator" and "Use the command line"
> In theory, the technical side should be a thirty second fix. The
> issue would
> be deciding new names. Some things shouldn't be too difficult, such as
> renaming Software Updates to Software Sources.
Combination of previous brings an idea - instead of modifying
application names, we could alter the problematic applications' popups
by adding a binary e.g like: "Terminal: Terminal emulator" and
"Konsole: Use the command line".
+ Both names would stay the same, so we wouldn't have do any actual
renaming and (!) we'd evade any "arguing" among desktops
+ The original explanatory use of popups would be kept
- Great for LXDE and XFCE, but there are no popups in Gnome 3 yet, thus
out of direct reach of Fedora for now.
> I wonder if this should be a QA test? It would help with improving the
> end product for us to check things like this, but it is also fairly
> as to what constitutes as 'too similar.' I'm for it, but the
> subjective nature makes coming up with a clear release criteria
I agree that deciding what is "too similar" can be a tricky one. But
for most of the current apps the problem's simpler - the names are the
Let's bring this up on today's QA meeting, I am sure we'll get a good
input on which way to go there.
At last Fedora QA meeting John Dulaney had a proposal concerning the issue of similar application names we use around Fedora desktops.
For example: surely sometimes you had both GNOME and XFCE installed and went for menus to open - say a terminal. The environment would use the same icon and a same name for both gnome-terminal and xfce-terminal, which resulted in you opening the other app than desired, perhaps (thanks to Murphy's laws :) ) more often than the desired one. More examples of this are "Software updates"/"Software update"(just within GNOME), "System Monitor" for both gnome-system-monitor and ksysguard, some "system-config-*" utilities vs. GNOME control panel applets and more.
This is a call for having a discussion on trying to establish some compromise - on what to put as a name in the desktop file for corresponding applications around different Fedora desktops as well as among applications inside each of those. The goal is simply to avoid people being unable to recognize specific applications around the desktop menus etc., which we could reach simply by rethinking the "name" fields in the *.desktop files of such applications.
The way KDE application launcher handles this also provides nice example for a design solution to this problem. They use a "Generic" (e.g. Terminal) field to describe the application primarily and have the name of the actual binary (e.g. Konsole) present in small letters when the generic name is not unique. For gnome-shell, in it's current in-high-development state, proposing a design like this may also be good idea. Other than that - at least handling this by making a renaming compromise among the desktop environments would be very nice.
We were thinking on expanding the release criteria to have one to deal with this issue, but for sure we need to discuss this first.
Thus - thoughts? :) (Might be a good idea in having the conversation joined in one list we are all subscribed - perhaps test or desktop?)
recently my plasma-desktop process is taking a rapidly growing amount of
and so I wish to find the responsible plasmoid.
is there a way to tell how much memory every plasmoid take?
I need a bit of help to figure out how this works...and what went wrong.
I'm running F15 64 bit, KDE. I've got the "Application Launcher" on the
"Default Panel" set to "Classic Style".
I wanted an icon for LibreOffice Writer on the Panel. So, from the
Application Launcher I navigated to Office and right clicked on the
Writer icon and picked "Add to Panel".
Then, I was working on a problem related to LibreOffice and NFS. I
wanted to change the icon setting for the icon that I'd placed on the
panel and call the LibreOffice app in a different way.
All of that seemed to work just fine.....
However, when I went back to the Application Launcher there was no
longer an icon for Writer under Office!
So, when you add the icon to a panel and then change the settings in the
panel icon...why does it "destroy" the icon in the Launcher?
Also, I add it back...and I get it in KDE....but GNOME (at least in
fallback mode) doesn't have Writer in its lists of applications.