[Freeciv-Dev] Re: new_city_dialog ver 12

[Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 05:28:16AM +0200, Daniel Sjölie wrote:
> 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...

I will look at the patch in the next days and will tell anything which
I dislike which is hopefully not much.

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1