After an evaluation, GNOME has moved from Bugzilla to GitLab. Learn more about GitLab.
No new issues can be reported in GNOME Bugzilla anymore.
To report an issue in a GNOME project, go to GNOME GitLab.
Do not go to GNOME Gitlab for: Bluefish, Doxygen, GnuCash, GStreamer, java-gnome, LDTP, NetworkManager, Tomboy.
Bug 331185 - ui changes from ui-review
ui changes from ui-review
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Product: gnome-screensaver
Classification: Deprecated
Component: general
unspecified
Other Linux
: Normal normal
: ---
Assigned To: gnome-screensaver maintainers
gnome-screensaver maintainers
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
 
Reported: 2006-02-14 20:00 UTC by William Jon McCann
Modified: 2006-02-15 18:13 UTC
See Also:
GNOME target: ---
GNOME version: ---


Attachments
patch (7.07 KB, patch)
2006-02-14 20:04 UTC, William Jon McCann
committed Details | Review

Description William Jon McCann 2006-02-14 20:00:24 UTC
Some good discussion in the ui-review led by Calum.  We agreed on a couple minor UI changes.  And there was one UI change for the preferences that we would like to make but couldn't come up with a better way.
Comment 1 William Jon McCann 2006-02-14 20:04:08 UTC
Created attachment 59363 [details] [review]
patch

I'll need to get approval from the release team.
Comment 2 William Jon McCann 2006-02-14 20:14:26 UTC
The changes are:
	* src/gs-lock-plug.c (get_user_on_host_name, create_page_one):
	Display "username on host" string instead of just "username".

	* data/gnome-screensaver-preferences.glade:
	Don't make the screensaver label bold or indent
	the rest of the dialog under it.
Comment 3 Danilo Segan 2006-02-14 23:08:55 UTC
Note that "username on host" is hard to localise (at least ugly in some languages: in Serbian, we'd want to put "host" through declinations, and it's impossible with a dynamic value).

At least "username@host" keeps the technical background behind it (which is an advantage and disadvantage at the same time, of course).  I'll still give out my i18n approval.
Comment 4 William Jon McCann 2006-02-14 23:11:59 UTC
Great.  Since j5's approval was conditional on your approval that makes 3 of 3.  Thanks.
Comment 5 Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay 2006-02-15 12:39:29 UTC
username on hostname is a potential minefield for L10n - I see that approvals have been given but is this change really required ?
Comment 6 Danilo Segan 2006-02-15 17:27:49 UTC
Sankarshan: this is problematic for Serbian as well, yet I've given out my approval.  Why?  Well, because I'll probably work around it by using "%s@%s" or put hostname in quotes, or something like that.  Having a hostname is regarded as a really useful piece of information by the UI guys.

How would you put them out together for your own language? Maybe that can work for everybody else as well? (I know I can't do that for Serbian, since hostname would have to go through declinations if I'd be aiming for "perfect wording")

Btw, are hostnames really that important? Most home-users would have made-up ones, right?
Comment 7 Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay 2006-02-15 18:13:44 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> Btw, are hostnames really that important? Most home-users would have made-up
> ones, right?

Username on Hostname might be a good idea for a locked-down console at a place where it is useful to understand which box you are hitting (considering you have a KVM) and the virtual consoles are disabled. Demarcation of hostname using characters like quotes might not be a workaround for all languages. Will like to think over a way to resolve this in bn/bn_IN