[Freeciv-Dev] Re: new_city_dialog ver 12

[Daniel Sjölie <deepone@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2001-10-22 02:45:08, Vasco Alexandre Da Silva Costa wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Oct 2001, Mike Kaufman wrote:
> 
> > there's a new version in incoming/ on the ftp site, Daniel will mirror
> > it soon at
> > 
> >         http://www.acc.umu.se/~deepone/freeciv/
> > 
> > changes:
> > 
> > Another map sensitivity patch by Christian
> > worklist commit problem fixed (I hope)
> > a couple of city investigation bugs fixed.
> > 
> > Unless Christian comes up with any pressing issues, (since he seems to
> > be the only one looking at it) I would suggest this be applied to CVS.
> > 
> > Yes, there are sure to still be bugs, but they're not going to get found
> > at this point until more people start looking at it.
> > 
> > Maintainers: please start taking a good hard look.
> 
> Looks nice.
> 
> Some usability comments:
> * the bigger the buttons are the easier they are to hit. i'm particularly
> talking about the up & down buttons in the worklist but also the help
> button.

Ok, I'll buy that...

> * the less space between buttons belonging to the same class the better.
> * there is too much space between the buttons in the bottom (i know the
> old dialog also was like this but that doesn't make it right :)).

Here I disagree... I think they're big enough and easier to make out
with some spacing...

> I'm giving these comments based on:
> <http://www.acc.umu.se/~deepone/freeciv/worklist_screen_shot.png>
> 
> It would be nice if you people provided some up to date screenshots of the
> dialog in a clean gtk+ theme (or no theme at all like the link i
> mentioned). That way maintainers without spare time to look at the source
> code can provide (i hope) useful comments :-)

Well, nothing has changed in the way it looks for well over a month...
The worklist dialog still looks exactly like on that screenshot...
This is the 12th version since august and the patch has been around a
lot longer than that... New suggestions are not quite as fun anymore...
This may be the way it is for everybody but I think it's too much...
When you have fixed everything required a given number of times it should
go into cvs if there's no visible bugs... A patch shouldn't have to be
perfect to make cvs...

Well, I'm sorry if I'm a little cranky... I guess what really irks me is
that this patch has seemed to be so close to being ready for so long...
My involvement started 2 months ago with Thue saying he thought it was
ready... There were some concerns raised at this time and they were
dealt with... Then there were new concerns and these were dealt with...
And so on... This would be natural if it had been clear that we were in
a developing phase but we seemed to cross the finish line again and
again only to see it jerked further ahead...

I think we really need some clearer definition of when a patch is done
than "when noone says anything more"... After a few iterations of a
patch goals should be set that would lead to cvs inclusion when met..
This should be possible, right? Or at least it shold be possible to
clearly request such goal and get a clear response (I think we did
request such goals and got an unclear response) - if you get no response
(you should get a "no response" response :) you know you're in the
developing phase...

/Daniel

-- 
Now take a deep breath, smile and don't take life so seriously... :)