Gnome-Bt should be removed from applications menu

[Emilio Pozuelo Monfort]

Nanley Chery wrote:
> Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote:
>> What if someone sends me a mail and I'm using Mutt? I don't think the
>> terminal will open gnome-bt. Is that a valid case for you? (although I
>> won't expect any normal user to use Mutt ;)
> 
> You are definitely right that a normal user wouldn't be using Mutt -
> that's for the hardcore users. And if a hardcore user insists on working
> only through the terminal, I fail to see how a menu entry for a
> graphical app is better than running gnome-bt from the terminal with the
> command, ' gnome-btdownload '.

That's a good point.

>> I don't think the point of the menu being too huge has any value
>> right now, and it's easy and user-friendly to edit the menus and hide some
>> entries. 
> 
> If the artwork team had the same sentiment, they wouldn't care about providing
> a brand new and refreshing theme - they would be satisfied with just giving a 
> clunky theme as it is just as easy to change Ubuntu's appearance. This is not
> the case; however, because first impressions really count. And just as the art 
> team would like new users to be impressed by the new theme, so it should be
> that the desktop team should, as well, want users to be impressed by the simplicity
> and intuitiveness of the default desktop - a goal that adding the Gnome-Bt entry 
> (or any unnecessary complexity) would hurt.

So let's rename Internet to Network, Graphics to Design, Sound & Video to
Multimedia, and so on. I don't think that's a good point. "Let's change the
menus for the sake of changing them". That looks ok for the artwork team, but I
don't think this is comparable to the Desktop Team. We need better reasons than
that IMHO.

> 
>> It's not that user-friendly to add new ones though - you will need to
>> enter the command, search an icon for it if you want it to be nice... I won't
>> expect a normal user to know that the torrent client's binary is
>> /usr/bin/gnome-btdownload.
> 
> That is just not true. The process you've describe above is for adding a 
> launcher (usually it's used for adding a non-menu entry). To enable an entry, 
> all a user has to do is right click the menubar, choose "Edit Menus," go to the 
> Internet section, and check off Gnome-bt. Enabling an entry is as easy as can be.

Yes, you can *recheck* it if you disabled it before... But if you don't install
it by default as you are proposing, how would you recheck it if there's no entry
at all? You will need to enter the command and look for the icon as I explained.
So it's true.

> 
> With the typical user in mind, I believe it wise to remove the gnome-bt from 
> the menu.

There's still the point Andrea Veri pointed out that this would mean diverting
from Debian. Is this only change good enough for such a diff? This will mean we
need to merge this change everytime Debian releases a new version. Is it worth
it? (not that it's that complicated, but someone will have to do it).

I'm not against changing this, and I'm not the best person for arguing against
this either since I don't use it. But I'm curious on what people who uses it
thinks about the menu removal. If people using it think we should remove this
too, then I'll be ok with this change.

Best regards,
Emilio

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-desktop/attachments/20080106/7294d5e9/attachment.pgp