[Libreoffice] FW: [PATCH] Introduce HideDisabledMenuItems style setting

[Christian Lohmaier]

Hi Michael,

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:31 PM, Michael Meeks
<michael.meeks at novell.com> wrote:
>
>        Firstly - progress is not well served by hindering, and slowing down
> people committing patches - yes, some things may break when things are
> changed, but then - the fixes should be able to get in quickly too.

It isn't a fix when it breaks common HIG behaviour,
All was asked for was a clarification of what the patch actually does.
This is not hindering in any way.

>        It -is- the end of the world to de-motivate, and loose developers
> contributing code; we need to presume contributor sanity until proven
> otherwise, and merge unless we know it is certainly wrong.

No, With this "We don't care about what the user sees as some
developer wrote a patch" you tell UX, QA, and regular users to fuck
off.

> Shouting about the potential loss
> (though in fact it is not lost), of a minor feature, available only to
> expert users and sysadmins, does not seem proportionate to me.

Yes, and it is always the developers who don't actually use the
software who then come with this argument "Why would anyone cry about
loosing this feature". Sorry, but I absolutely don't agree with this.

The patch might do what is no problem, but when it really just hides
instead of greying out inactive (as opposed to removed-by-sysadmin)
functoins, then this is not a "minor feature".

Again: A simple clarification and all is fine. But you then just jump
in with "read the code" isn't helpful.

>        Also, by delaying developers with lots of noise, quite apart from
> de-motivating them, we waste opportunities for using their time for
> other improvements to the user interface.

Bullshit, sorry. I cannot hear this anymore. All the noise would be
gone in an instant if people would bother to actually answer the
questions stated.

>        So - in summary, there is huge danger of de-motivation, dis-couragement
> and sterilization of the developer community from applying
> indiscriminate push-back. -Particularly- if it is inexpert push-back. In
> this case,

Again Christoph is hardly an "in-expert" when it comes to UX, I don't
consider myself clueless either.

> it seems the distinction between a -context- menu and the
> main menu, that is present if you read the patch (though somewhat
> missing from the original mail, and the naming sadly) is quite
> important.

A simple mail "This patch does this and that, and not what you think"
would have been enough.

>        Anyhow - I am sure none of us intend to cause problems, delay
> improvements, de-motivate developers or end up shouting :-) so -
> hopefully we can get back to some positive work on the product.

Sorry, but your mail clearly has the message: We love developers, no
matter what stupid their changes are, if they can get a foot into the
door we welcome them with open hands. But we don't give a damn about
usability experts and users, since whatever they have to complain
about can be fixed later.

Your smileys don't make it any less harsh.

ciao
Christian