Re: [Pharo-users] [Metacello] Re: Metacellobrowser feedback
My 2 cents on this topic: user interface consistency cannot be underestimated. I called these 'leds' unit-test icons because thats what they are (in my mind and I guess also for a lot of other people). So using them for anything else is not a good idea at all. Alex' proposal seems (to me) a much better idea. On 23 Apr 2011, at 13:05, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I agree with you. The browser is not yet a replacement for manual editing. The validation mechanism has to be present.
Maybe the led can be traded with a red bold font for the project name. The meaning of the red font is clear and unambiguous. The led can then instead be used for the test. How does that sound?
I will work on the test soon. This week end maybe.
Alexandre
Le 23 avr. 2011 à 11:43, Dale Henrichs <dhenrich@vmware.com> a écrit :
Alexandre,
I think the 'run tests' command is great idea ...
Validation wil be important as long as folks edit configs by hand, so validation needs to be part of the tool set (whether automatic or manual) ...
Just because people don't do it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be doing it ... it is very easy to introduce an error that won't show up until you try to use the configuration, so validation is important...
I would prefer to see it automatic which then begs the question of how to notify the user that there is a validation issue and which configuration/version has the issue ... presumably we have a set of feedback options that we can use ...
Dale
-- Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Johan, Just one point ... the ui for MetacelloBrowser is not expected to be complete at this point ... I think there are still a number of commands that need to be added before we can start considering what the final ui will look like ... once we have a feel for the set of commands that should be included and the type of work flow we are supporting (neither of which has been decided upon) we will be able to fine tune the ui and there is a lot of work that needs to be done ... You're comments about the fact that you had difficulty figuring out how to call your #loadDefault method are where we need to be focussing our efforts ... this is a missing piece of functionality that needs to be addressed. Spiffing up a ui _before_ you've decided on the final set of commands to be supported is the same type of mistake you make when making a premature optimization of an algorithm ... For me the biggest problem that I struggle with is the number of times that I must break out of the MetacelloBrowser to do work with Monticello Browser windows...I have included a number of commands in the MetacelloBrowser that allow you to perform many of the MonticelloBrowser functions and I see the need to add more ... So I begin thinking that maybe these functions should be incorporated into the MetacelloBrowser ... allow the direct viewing of the repository/history .... I'm also not happy with having to go the browser to see certain bits of information from the Metacello spec (like the description) .... I think we need to incorporate that as well ... We need major improvement in the ui for creating a configuration ... major work needs to be done there ... ... and more ... Dale On Apr 23, 2011, at 12:57 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
My 2 cents on this topic: user interface consistency cannot be underestimated. I called these 'leds' unit-test icons because thats what they are (in my mind and I guess also for a lot of other people). So using them for anything else is not a good idea at all. Alex' proposal seems (to me) a much better idea.
On 23 Apr 2011, at 13:05, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I agree with you. The browser is not yet a replacement for manual editing. The validation mechanism has to be present.
Maybe the led can be traded with a red bold font for the project name. The meaning of the red font is clear and unambiguous. The led can then instead be used for the test. How does that sound?
I will work on the test soon. This week end maybe.
Alexandre
Le 23 avr. 2011 à 11:43, Dale Henrichs <dhenrich@vmware.com> a écrit :
Alexandre,
I think the 'run tests' command is great idea ...
Validation wil be important as long as folks edit configs by hand, so validation needs to be part of the tool set (whether automatic or manual) ...
Just because people don't do it doesn't mean that they shouldn't be doing it ... it is very easy to introduce an error that won't show up until you try to use the configuration, so validation is important...
I would prefer to see it automatic which then begs the question of how to notify the user that there is a validation issue and which configuration/version has the issue ... presumably we have a set of feedback options that we can use ...
Dale
-- Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Hi Dale, I understand the point you are making. I never intended my mails to be of the 'do this now' kind. I am just sharing my experiences and points of view. I have always had strong opinions about UI elements and lately even more since I have been reading up on the topic (because of my work on AspectMaps ). If my comments can be of any use and may be taken into account at some point, great, if not, no problem. I get that this is a work in progress and I am sure you have a lot of other things on your plate, as do we all :-/ (assuming you are replying to both my mails of last saturday, btw) On 24 Apr 2011, at 11:52, Dale Henrichs wrote:
Johan,
Just one point ... the ui for MetacelloBrowser is not expected to be complete at this point ... I think there are still a number of commands that need to be added before we can start considering what the final ui will look like ... once we have a feel for the set of commands that should be included and the type of work flow we are supporting (neither of which has been decided upon) we will be able to fine tune the ui and there is a lot of work that needs to be done ...
You're comments about the fact that you had difficulty figuring out how to call your #loadDefault method are where we need to be focussing our efforts ... this is a missing piece of functionality that needs to be addressed.
Spiffing up a ui _before_ you've decided on the final set of commands to be supported is the same type of mistake you make when making a premature optimization of an algorithm ...
For me the biggest problem that I struggle with is the number of times that I must break out of the MetacelloBrowser to do work with Monticello Browser windows...I have included a number of commands in the MetacelloBrowser that allow you to perform many of the MonticelloBrowser functions and I see the need to add more ... So I begin thinking that maybe these functions should be incorporated into the MetacelloBrowser ... allow the direct viewing of the repository/history .... I'm also not happy with having to go the browser to see certain bits of information from the Metacello spec (like the description) .... I think we need to incorporate that as well ... We need major improvement in the ui for creating a configuration ... major work needs to be done there ...
... and more ...
Dale On Apr 23, 2011, at 12:57 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
My 2 cents on this topic: user interface consistency cannot be underestimated. I called these 'leds' unit-test icons because thats what they are (in my mind and I guess also for a lot of other people). So using them for anything else is not a good idea at all. Alex' proposal seems (to me) a much better idea.
-- Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Johan, I will be replying separately to your other email on Saturday .. . the one below was written before I read your other email:) Frankly I am embarassed by the current state of the configuration construct steps ... and I am sad that you wasted some of your time trying out something that I knew was pretty broken... Your feedback is very welcome and to be honest your efforts have spurred me to focus on solving the construction problem before moving too far forward ... I was hoping for feedback on using the MetacelloBrowser for things not related to creating the initial configuration, but it is obvious from your experience (and others) creating that initial configuration is the thing that folks are looking for when opening up the MetacelloBrowser... In the end this is a good thing so I do appreciate your effort ... I know that UIs bring out the strong opinions of folks and have tried to stay out of the ui/gui business for Metacello, but my own storng opinions won't let me:) Thank you very much ... Dale On 04/25/2011 11:00 AM, Johan Fabry wrote:
Hi Dale,
I understand the point you are making. I never intended my mails to be of the 'do this now' kind. I am just sharing my experiences and points of view. I have always had strong opinions about UI elements and lately even more since I have been reading up on the topic (because of my work on AspectMaps ). If my comments can be of any use and may be taken into account at some point, great, if not, no problem. I get that this is a work in progress and I am sure you have a lot of other things on your plate, as do we all :-/
(assuming you are replying to both my mails of last saturday, btw)
On 24 Apr 2011, at 11:52, Dale Henrichs wrote:
Johan,
Just one point ... the ui for MetacelloBrowser is not expected to be complete at this point ... I think there are still a number of commands that need to be added before we can start considering what the final ui will look like ... once we have a feel for the set of commands that should be included and the type of work flow we are supporting (neither of which has been decided upon) we will be able to fine tune the ui and there is a lot of work that needs to be done ...
You're comments about the fact that you had difficulty figuring out how to call your #loadDefault method are where we need to be focussing our efforts ... this is a missing piece of functionality that needs to be addressed.
Spiffing up a ui _before_ you've decided on the final set of commands to be supported is the same type of mistake you make when making a premature optimization of an algorithm ...
For me the biggest problem that I struggle with is the number of times that I must break out of the MetacelloBrowser to do work with Monticello Browser windows...I have included a number of commands in the MetacelloBrowser that allow you to perform many of the MonticelloBrowser functions and I see the need to add more ... So I begin thinking that maybe these functions should be incorporated into the MetacelloBrowser ... allow the direct viewing of the repository/history .... I'm also not happy with having to go the browser to see certain bits of information from the Metacello spec (like the description) .... I think we need to incorporate that as well ... We need major improvement in the ui for creating a configuration ... major work needs to be done there ...
... and more ...
Dale On Apr 23, 2011, at 12:57 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
My 2 cents on this topic: user interface consistency cannot be underestimated. I called these 'leds' unit-test icons because thats what they are (in my mind and I guess also for a lot of other people). So using them for anything else is not a good idea at all. Alex' proposal seems (to me) a much better idea.
-- Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On 25 Apr 2011, at 14:10, Dale Henrichs wrote:
Johan,
I will be replying separately to your other email on Saturday .. . the one below was written before I read your other email:)
OK no problem :-)
Frankly I am embarassed by the current state of the configuration construct steps ... and I am sad that you wasted some of your time trying out something that I knew was pretty broken...
Dont worry Dale, I have spent much more time lately on things that were in a much worse state. (Eclipse comes to mind for example.)
Your feedback is very welcome and to be honest your efforts have spurred me to focus on solving the construction problem before moving too far forward ...
I was hoping for feedback on using the MetacelloBrowser for things not related to creating the initial configuration, but it is obvious from your experience (and others) creating that initial configuration is the thing that folks are looking for when opening up the MetacelloBrowser...
Yes, the first step when doing something is usually the hardest. The thing is, we often tend to forget our first steps. Maybe we are subconsciously blocking them out ;-)
In the end this is a good thing so I do appreciate your effort ...
My pleasure, I appreciate you guys creating a browser for Metacello!
I know that UIs bring out the strong opinions of folks and have tried to stay out of the ui/gui business for Metacello, but my own storng opinions won't let me:)
Thank you very much ...
Again, my pleasure. When there is a new version out that addresses some of my concerns I will be happy to give it a spin ... -- Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
participants (2)
-
Dale Henrichs -
Johan Fabry