[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: kde-panel-devel
Subject: Re: Battery Monitor revamp
From: Dario Freddi <drf54321 () gmail ! com>
Date: 2013-05-27 9:36:40
Message-ID: CAFFVnfN0SVnmrsQ3KnBdWo8voXeUWBYXUc=feyHWwzNhra5yXw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]
[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]
2013/5/27 Kai Uwe Broulik <kde@privat.broulik.de>
> I could add it to the expandable battery details but it will show the
> overall remaining time for all batteries in contrast to the other
> properties which are directly related to the battery they emerge from.
> Actually I don't care. I don't have a strong opinion on whether to show it
> or not.
>
> Would that be an acceptable compromise for all?
>
I don't really like the compromise as it makes the estimation even worse
(even if for most cases you only have 1 battery). I can have a look at the
code over the next days and see if I can provide a patch.
P.S.: Thanks for your work, the new plasmoid looks great
>
> Dario Freddi <drf54321@gmail.com> schrieb:
>
>
> 2013/5/24 <kde@privat.broulik.de>
>
>> What's missing:
>> - Remaining time. There is no "global" category anymore and since we
>> discourage and removed the option for displaying remaining time, I didn't
>> see the need to implement it in solod so we can show it in eg. the battery
>> advanced properties
>>
>>
> I promised to never talk about this again, but I have to break in: as
> co-maintainer of the battery plasmoid I won't accept this change at all. I
> am not going to argue about usefulness, defaults and truthfulness of the
> value as too much has been said already. I will just say that many
> distributions and users are relying on this hidden feature, and we cannot
> remove it ESPECIALLY when we won't be providing updates to 4.x anymore.
>
> Such a choice has only one possible outcome: distributions and users
> patching the plasmoid for restoring the functionality, hidden or not,
> resulting in harder bug triaging and higher chances for breakage.
>
> Again, the argument is not technical but completely focused on what some
> users and distributions apparently want, and the obvious consequences of
> the change.
>
>
[Attachment #5 (text/html)]
<div dir="ltr">2013/5/27 Kai Uwe Broulik <span dir="ltr"><<a \
href="mailto:kde@privat.broulik.de" \
target="_blank">kde@privat.broulik.de</a>></span><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div \
class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> I could add it to the expandable \
battery details but it will show the overall remaining time for all batteries in \
contrast to the other properties which are directly related to the battery they \
emerge from.<br>Actually I don't care. I don't have a strong opinion on \
whether to show it or not.<br> <br>Would that be an acceptable compromise for \
all?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>I don't really like the compromise \
as it makes the estimation even worse (even if for most cases you only have 1 \
battery). I can have a look at the code over the next days and see if I can provide a \
patch.</div> <div style><br></div><div style>P.S.: Thanks for your work, the new \
plasmoid looks great</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 \
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>Dario Freddi <<a \
href="mailto:drf54321@gmail.com" target="_blank">drf54321@gmail.com</a>> \
schrieb:<div class="HOEnZb"> <div class="h5"><br><br><div dir="ltr">2013/5/24 <span \
dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kde@privat.broulik.de" \
target="_blank">kde@privat.broulik.de</a>></span><div class="gmail_extra"><div \
class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
What's missing:<br>
- Remaining time. There is no "global" category anymore and since we \
discourage and removed the option for displaying remaining time, I didn't see the \
need to implement it in solod so we can show it in eg. the battery advanced \
properties<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I promised to never talk about this again, but I \
have to break in: as co-maintainer of the battery plasmoid I won't accept this \
change at all. I am not going to argue about usefulness, defaults and truthfulness of \
the value as too much has been said already. I will just say that many distributions \
and users are relying on this hidden feature, and we cannot remove it ESPECIALLY when \
we won't be providing updates to 4.x anymore.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Such a choice has only one possible outcome: distributions and \
users patching the plasmoid for restoring the functionality, hidden or not, resulting \
in harder bug triaging and higher chances for breakage.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Again, the argument is not technical but completely focused on \
what some users and distributions apparently want, and the obvious consequences of \
the change.</div></div><br></div></div> \
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
_______________________________________________
Plasma-devel mailing list
Plasma-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic