GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 636206
Gnome 3.XX Share System Settings UI Mockup
Last modified: 2012-11-06 15:48:51 UTC
Created attachment 175613 [details] Gnome 3.XX Sharing Mockup (PNG) This is, in attachment, a mockup of the UI of "Files Sharing" section in "Privacy and Sharing" in "System Setting" of Gnome 3.XX. This mockup are in CC By-Sa.
Created attachment 175614 [details] The Inkskape SVG file. I add the Inkskape SVG file too.
From a quick look on the first screenshot, it's not obvious what protocol is used for sharing. People may think Samba as a default but we actually use WebDAV. Also a label containing current hostname would be helpful to show somewhere.
Some remarks regarding this UI: * Having both "options" and "advanced" buttons is confusing * Breaking sentences halfway does not work from a i18n point of view * Zeroconf is tech talk * Having "all settings" if there's also "options" and "advanced" is confusing and ambiguous * The "Disable all" button is at an awkward place * What is the "disable all" button supposed to do if there's also a "disable" radio button? * Why the "cancel" and "apply" buttons? Wasn't Gnome supposed to be instant-apply? * The "Sharing" and "Folders" seem misaligned
I forget the explanation. XD - In the left list you add folders that you want share. - Options, on the right, are specific to the folder selected on the liste (like in Account Settings of Empathy). - You can enable/disable sharing of each folder add to the list. - You can specify "automatically enabled only when you are on a specific place" (like home, work, etc...). For this, just check the line "Enable only at home". The option button show a pop-up window to select "Where to auto-activate the sharing". You can select some places.¹ - Click to "home" or "places" words to open the "Place Settings".¹ - "Disable All" is for disable all sharing.¹ - "Files sharing" option enable the simple file sharing like in present-day Gnome-User-Share. With "Options" button you can specify general options (read only or read/write, password, etc). With "Advanced" button you can specify what protocole using (WebDav, SMB, etc) and specific options of each protocoles. "Options" and "Advanced" button show a Pop-up window.¹ - "Multimedia Sharing" option enable the "Media Sharing" (DLNA, DAAP, etc). "Options" button is to specfy general option (auto-encode, read only, etc...). "Advanced" button is to specify what protocole using (Daap, DLNA, Dacp, etc...) and specific options of each protocoles. "Options" and "Advanced" button show a Pop-up window.¹ ¹= I work to improve this. I make a new mockup. @Tomas Bzatek: The "Hostname Label" is a good idea. But isn't it displayed on "About this computer"? @Wouter Bolsterlee (uws): - «Having both "options" and "advanced" buttons is confusing» >> Yes. "Advanced" can be a section (tab?) on the options pop-up window. I add this to the next mockup. - «Breaking sentences halfway does not work from a i18n point of view» >> What? Can you say more? - «Zeroconf is tech talk» >> A better word proposal? - «Having "all settings" if there's also "options" and "advanced" is confusing and ambiguous» >> "Options" is placed on a specific line, it's for specify options of this line. All Settings are standard on Gnome System Settings for Gnome 3. I think is good if it can be rename on "All System Settings". But this message is not for me. ;) - «The "Disable all" button is at an awkward place» >> On the bottom of the list is better? - « Why the "cancel" and "apply" buttons? Wasn't Gnome supposed to be instant-apply?» >> When you enable sharing, it's with default options. If you dont want a read/write sharing or if you want enable password, you are happy if you can change options before start sharing. No? - «The "Sharing" and "Folders" seem misaligned» >> Yes. Because sharing options is not generals options but is specific of each folder. Thanks for your comments, I make a new mockup. ;)
Created attachment 175675 [details] Share Settings V2 (PNG) The version 2.
Created attachment 175678 [details] Share Settings V2 (SVG Inkscape) The SVG Inkscape fomat. What change?: - On the list, you can see the name and the location of each folder. You have a littre circle to inform if the sharing is enable or not for each folder. Green == Enable. Red == Disable. Need a third color for "Enabled with condition"? - Simplification of the conditional enabling. You can now specify a place without auto-enabled at home. - "Disable All" are moved. - "Advanced" button move to their respective "Options" pop-up.
I'm no UX expert, and I'd really like to get the take of an Allan Day, mpt, the Calums or Andreas on the details, but I do have some comments on the mock-up (which are similar to some of the comments Wouter had). I *really* like that sharing files & browsing other people's file shares is just integrated into Nautilus - that's where it should be, for the most part, and not in system settings. I also like that the interface for sharing is right click->Share this folder, and the interface for finding other shares on the intranet is "Network places" in Nautilus. SMB is a de facto standard now. For anything which (a) requires manual sharing because it's a non-default protocol or (b) requires manual mounting, it also seems like Nautilus is the best place for this to happen. I'm not sure exactly what a good interface for creating a CIFS or NFS share might be, but I think the interface for SparkleShare, Ubuntu One or Dropbox is pretty good for cloud storage (that is, a special folder where we share things, with an online interface for handling ACLs for contacts) Once you take that away, the system file sharing sessions come down to: "Allow users to share folders" and "Allow users to view other people's shares" (as security options, presumably) - and I would argue that both of those are unnecessary & should be yes by default. I do like your idea of having conditional sharing enabled, but I am not sure what the UI should look like (how do you define "Home", for example? I know how it might be implemented (wifi ESSID, I guess) but how would you expose that to the user?). Then there's bluetooth file sharing, which I don't see in your mock-up. And this is an opportunity, I think, to do better than everyone else - I have yet to see a nice UI for transfering files over Bluetooth (Mac OS X comes closest). For DAAP, I'd expect that to be in the music player. Although there's an argument for all music players to share the settings... I would expect the "share this printer" option to be in printer configuration, not sharing configuration. As Wouter said, Zeroconf really isn't something to expose to the user - a checkbox along the lines of "Automatically search for shares on the local network" covers the only option you'll need for that. It should be possible to turn off, and should be on by default. I don't think there's much else to say about that.
So I think there are two main ways to address this problem, both have their advantages and disadvantages. One is to put file sharing in nautilus, printer sharing in printing etc. This has the advantage of being close to the most common vessel of handling those, but also the disadvantage of having all sharing spread out all across the place. The other one is to put all sharing in one central place. This makes it easier to get in control of what you're sharing exactly and the possibility to turn those off when needed (daap sharing is great at home, but not so much at conferences). This could also potentially have scaling issues. I think a good middle ground is to have a button in the printer settings dialog for example saying [sharing] that would take you to this dialog. Another note regarding the file sharing mechanism is that we no longer will be having Nautilus as the canonical way of accessing files [1] [2], so moving it out of Nautilus would be a good thing because of that. 1. http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-shell-list/2010-April/msg00054.html 2. http://seilo.geekyogre.com/2010/12/revisiting-gnome-shell-zeitgeist/
Gendre: Thanks for getting started on this. I think the tab approach could have some issues with scaling here (say we end up with 10 items here). Maybe do it as a sidebar instead. That would align with what we're doing for printers [1] and web accounts [2] 1. http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/Printers 2. http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/Profile
re comment #8: Andreas, is it possible to do like in Mac OS X, and have Edit->Settings->Sharing open the system settings sharing options? That would be the best of both worlds - context locally when you might actually need it, and everything consistent & grouped together session-wide. It would be a bit like with accessibility settings for keyboard & mouse (the settings accessible both through keyboard settings and a11y settings). Dave.
Created attachment 180234 [details] Mockup for the sharring section in Gnome control Center (PNG version) I update the mockup. News: - Use the switch GTK Widget. - Remove "Apply" and "Cancel" buttons. - Add Bluetooth sharing option. - Some changes on tabulation to be OK with the present Printer panel of Control Center. - Add mochup for options window. Note about options window: - Except bluetooth, all option is splitted on two section: Access and Advanced. - On Acess section, the triangle yellow indicates that an option choose by user are not supported by the protocols choosed. What option is not supported is indicate on tooltip when user pass the mouse under the triangle. Ex: transcoding is not supported by DAAP libraries.
Created attachment 180235 [details] Mockup for the sharring section in Gnome control Center (Inkscape SVG version)
Created attachment 180241 [details] File Sharing Mockup (PNG)
Created attachment 180242 [details] File Sharing Mockup (Inkscape SVG)
Created attachment 180243 [details] File Sharing Options Mockup (PNG)
Created attachment 180244 [details] File Sharing Options Mockup (Inkscape SVG)
Just a minor nit pick on the Sun Solaris (NFS) string. I would just put "Network Filesystem (NFS)" rather than picking Sun Solaris. Otherwise, I like what you've done so far.
If people think my mockup is too difficult for new-user, we can use the UI on Gnome 2 with an "Advanced" button to show the UI in my mockup. ------------------- -------------------- | | | | | Simple mode | --Advanced button--> | My mockup | | | | | ------------------- -------------------- In the simple mode, you can only enable the sharing of the ~/Public folder (like in Gnome 2.XX) and in Advanced mode, you have the UI that I design.
Damn. The scheme that Bugzilla don't want to reproduce is: Simple mode --Advanced button--> My mockup
FWIW, those are the file sharing use cases: http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing NFS isn't in any of those. And we probably don't want to have a separation between "file" sharing and other types of sharing. We just have use different use cases.
Created attachment 180359 [details] modified layout Here is a bit of relayout of the design. Let me know what you think. * Places goes on top, allows you for setting up different sharing profiles for when at home, when at the office, or at a train station. * Sidebar to align with the design of other control center panels (region & language, printers, user accounts etc.) * Allows you to turn on and off sharing of a specific kind in the sidebar directly * Sharing is a expanding treeview, similar to how the addons panes work in Firefox, or jqueryied web UIs (let me know if this is crack and breaks a11y btw).
Created attachment 180360 [details] modified layout (source)
*** Bug 471366 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I'd really like to see my initial questions addressed - they were not minor "shuffle things about" or improving layout type concerns - this looks far too complicated for what we should have in the GUI. Also, I would love to see the Calums, Allan or mpt commenting on this - it's an important part of the desktop & it's important to get it right, and professional UX/usability input is important. Dave.
Andreas Nilsson, your idea is really good. The part on left is verry good. But the part specific to file sharing need some work. So, I update your modified layout. In my new mockup, you are 2 modes: Quick and Advanced. With Quick mode, you can just enable/disable the sharing of the ~/Public folder and you can protect read and/or write with password. It's good if you just want to share somes files and don't want to pass more than 15 secondes to start sharing. (some gnome designer will be happy ;) ) With Advanced mode, you can: - Define some folders to share. - Use personal name for recognize them. - Have comment thath will be shown when you pass the mouse over the entry in the list of folders shared. - Define the access rules. - Define protocoles using. With these UI, all can be happy: - New and/or pressed users that want only a quick solution. - Gnome Designers that want a quick feature for New and/or pressed user. - User with some specifics needs that a simple sharing of the Public folder can't satisfy. - Admin system that want to have a good control over its computer. - Etc... PS: The window title of option of each folder sharing need a better tittle, because "Files Sharing Options" is too general. XD I think we can use the personal name of the sharing + "Options". No? PPS: The quick mode is a request of Ebassy. Sorry if I offended you on IRC chan, I am a bit explosive in some times.
Created attachment 180422 [details] remodified layout My rework from the Andreas Nilsson work.
Created attachment 180423 [details] remodified layout (Inkscape SVG)
Created attachment 180424 [details] remodified layout options (PNG)
Created attachment 180425 [details] remodified layout options (Inkscape SVG)
(In reply to comment #25) > Andreas Nilsson, your idea is really good. The part on left is verry good. > > But the part specific to file sharing need some work. So, I update your > modified layout. > > In my new mockup, you are 2 modes: Quick and Advanced. I'll put a stop to this right here. We don't want "Advanced modes".
Dave Neary, you want to speak about integrate file sharing into Nautilus? I think it's possible to have this feature too. If the Advanced mode is enabled, you can have an "Share this folder " options when you make a secondary click with mouse under a folder (or in "Edition" menu, in nautilus). This option shows the options windows (see "remodified layout options" file in attachment, at windows not marked "WORK IN PROGRESS"). But it need to add ON/OFF and delete buttons to this option windows, in General section, only when they're called by Nautilus.
(In reply to comment #30) > (In reply to comment #25) > > Andreas Nilsson, your idea is really good. The part on left is verry good. > > > > But the part specific to file sharing need some work. So, I update your > > modified layout. > > > > In my new mockup, you are 2 modes: Quick and Advanced. > > I'll put a stop to this right here. We don't want "Advanced modes". Why?
Because we don't provide "advanced" preferences in GNOME. Make the easiest to use sharing dialogue you can, where it's easy to configure.
But a simple "Share your ~/Public folder" is not sufficient. In some case, it's useless. We don't impose Gnome, so if we wan't taht people use Gnome, we need to satisfy their needs. Today or tommorow, you will come back to reallity and stop to be hostile for user that whant to have more than a simple checkbox.
(In reply to comment #34) > Today or tommorow, you will [...] Sébastien Gendre: Please do read http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct before any further activity in GNOME Bugzilla. Thank you.
I didn't tell you to remove features, just not to split UIs into "simple" and "advanced" modes.
(In reply to comment #35) > (In reply to comment #34) > > Today or tommorow, you will > [...] > > Sébastien Gendre: Please do read http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct before any > further activity in GNOME Bugzilla. Thank you. I read this. I'm sorry if I have offended you. But this misdemeanor don't cancel my arguments. Some Gnome designers and developpers wan't _only_ "simples" options but it's is the wrong way.
(In reply to comment #36) > I didn't tell you to remove features, just not to split UIs into "simple" and > "advanced" modes. OK. But how to.... Using the UI that I have design for "Advanced" mode, abandon the UI that I have design for "Quick" mode and add "~/Public folder" by default? I'll think about this and hop to have another mockup tomorrow. And, again, sorry if I was too explosive.
(In reply to comment #31) > Dave Neary, you want to speak about integrate file sharing into Nautilus? > > I think it's possible to have this feature too. Since this is how it works now, anything else would be a regression. Right-click->Share, with a very simple dialog for the minimum of preferences that you need to set to prevent undesired remote access. > If the Advanced mode is enabled, you can have an "Share this folder " options > when you make a secondary click with mouse under a folder (or in "Edition" > menu, in nautilus). Why would I need to activate an advanced mode to do something which is currently not an advanced operation? > This option shows the options windows (see "remodified > layout options" file in attachment, at windows not marked "WORK IN PROGRESS"). > But it need to add ON/OFF and delete buttons to this option windows, in General > section, only when they're called by Nautilus. I worry that you are spending a lot of time on something which is not at all aligned with the GNOME ethos. Sharing should be invisible. The filesystem should be an abstraction in the UI. Sharing a file over Bluetooth should be as easy as "Send to-> Over Bluetooth". Receiving a file over Bluetooth should not have any UI except an "Accept"/"Reject" dialog. Sharing music doesn't need any UI outside of the media player (Rhythmbox or Banshee), and even then, Avahi should be taking care of detecting and advertising DAAP or uPNP shares, in the same way that Nautilus detects network shares. There should almost be no sharing preferences at all - and certainly not in the system settings. So I don't understand why you persist in designing a settings dialog where not only do we centralise the preferences for half a dozen applications, but we do it under an "Advanced settings" tab. Also, may I say that your "some gnome designer will be happy ;)" remark earlier in comment #25 shows a profound disrespect for the people who have spent time designing this stuff, and are trying to keep everyone happy while avoiding a pollution of options that give too much choice. I agree with Bastien, I appreciate that you want to spend time designing dialogs, but perhaps you should evaluate your ability to do so first? I'm no designer, but I have been around enough product teams and read enough design books to have some idea about things - and even I would not presume to design a settings dialog without talking a lot to the designers who are working on this problem already. Cheers, Dave.
(In reply to comment #34) > But a simple "Share your ~/Public folder" is not sufficient. In some case, it's > useless. > > We don't impose Gnome, so if we wan't taht people use Gnome, we need to satisfy > their needs. > > Today or tommorow, you will come back to reallity and stop to be hostile for > user that whant to have more than a simple checkbox. Enfin... au cas ou ce mépris est une question de langue je vous expliquerai dans votre langue maternelle le problème. D'abord, définissez le problème. Ca doit être votre point de départ, alors que vous ne l'avez pas encore fait jusqu'à là. "Un utilisateur souhaite partager des documents dans un répertoire dans son espace personnel", par exemple. A la place, vous arrivez avec des idées toutes faites sur un dialog de préférence, et vous défendez votre proposition, que ce soit une solution au vrai problème ou non. Vous défendez une usine à gaz de 30 options, car vous avez une idée super méprisante des développeurs & designeurs en place. "Une case à cocher ne suffit pas", vous criez haut et fort. Mais vous ne vous posez pas la question contraire: n'est-ce que 30 options serait pas un peu trop? Est-ce que je peux proposer les mêmes choix à l'utilisateur en simplifiant, débroussaillant, et réflechir, tout simplement? C'est ce qui essaient de faire les designers et développeurs que vous méprisez tant. J'espère qu'en réfléchissant un peu, et surtout en vous rendant compte qu'en face de vous il y a des êtres humains, et pas des robots, vous comprendrez pourquoi votre façon de communiquer n'est pas adapté ou efficace. Dave. (Andre, no need to tell me not to speak in French, I just want to make sure we're not living a "lost in translation" moment).
(In reply to comment #39) > (In reply to comment #31) > > If the Advanced mode is enabled, you can have an "Share this folder " options > > when you make a secondary click with mouse under a folder (or in "Edition" > > menu, in nautilus). > Why would I need to activate an advanced mode to do something which is > currently not an advanced operation? Because the Quick mode permit only to share the ~/Public folder. But the Quick/Advanced mode is abandon. > > This option shows the options windows (see "remodified > > layout options" file in attachment, at windows not marked "WORK IN PROGRESS"). > > But it need to add ON/OFF and delete buttons to this option windows, in General > > section, only when they're called by Nautilus. > > I worry that you are spending a lot of time on something which is not at all > aligned with the GNOME ethos. Sharing should be invisible. The filesystem > should be an abstraction in the UI. Sharing a file over Bluetooth should be as > easy as "Send to-> Over Bluetooth". Receiving a file over Bluetooth should not > have any UI except an "Accept"/"Reject" dialog. Sharing music doesn't need any > UI outside of the media player (Rhythmbox or Banshee), and even then, Avahi > should be taking care of detecting and advertising DAAP or uPNP shares, in the > same way that Nautilus detects network shares. > > There should almost be no sharing preferences at all - and certainly not in the > system settings. So I don't understand why you persist in designing a settings > dialog where not only do we centralise the preferences for half a dozen > applications, but we do it under an "Advanced settings" tab. Advanced mode is an error, ok. But for the reste, I'm based ont this:http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing Quote: «Quickly visualize all forms for shared content and connections» This is why you have Media Sharing, File Sharing, etc... > Also, may I say that your "some gnome designer will be happy ;)" remark earlier > in comment #25 shows a profound disrespect for the people who have spent time > designing this stuff, and are trying to keep everyone happy while avoiding a > pollution of options that give too much choice. > > I agree with Bastien, I appreciate that you want to spend time designing > dialogs, but perhaps you should evaluate your ability to do so first? I'm no > designer, but I have been around enough product teams and read enough design > books to have some idea about things - and even I would not presume to design a > settings dialog without talking a lot to the designers who are working on this > problem already. This last part is patronizing. Really. I don't have "a profound disrespect for the people who have spent time designing this stuff". You don't like my work, ok, we understaind. But please, don't denigrate me with "evaluate your ability". ok?
(In reply to comment #40) > (In reply to comment #34) > > But a simple "Share your ~/Public folder" is not sufficient. In some case, it's > > useless. > > > > We don't impose Gnome, so if we wan't taht people use Gnome, we need to satisfy > > their needs. > > > > Today or tommorow, you will come back to reallity and stop to be hostile for > > user that whant to have more than a simple checkbox. > > Enfin... au cas ou ce mépris est une question de langue je vous expliquerai > dans votre langue maternelle le problème. > > D'abord, définissez le problème. Ca doit être votre point de départ, alors que > vous ne l'avez pas encore fait jusqu'à là. "Un utilisateur souhaite partager > des documents dans un répertoire dans son espace personnel", par exemple. > > A la place, vous arrivez avec des idées toutes faites sur un dialog de > préférence, et vous défendez votre proposition, que ce soit une solution au > vrai problème ou non. Vous défendez une usine à gaz de 30 options, car vous > avez une idée super méprisante des développeurs & designeurs en place. "Une > case à cocher ne suffit pas", vous criez haut et fort. Mais vous ne vous posez > pas la question contraire: n'est-ce que 30 options serait pas un peu trop? > Est-ce que je peux proposer les mêmes choix à l'utilisateur en simplifiant, > débroussaillant, et réflechir, tout simplement? > > C'est ce qui essaient de faire les designers et développeurs que vous méprisez > tant. > > J'espère qu'en réfléchissant un peu, et surtout en vous rendant compte qu'en > face de vous il y a des êtres humains, et pas des robots, vous comprendrez > pourquoi votre façon de communiquer n'est pas adapté ou efficace. > > Dave. > > (Andre, no need to tell me not to speak in French, I just want to make sure > we're not living a "lost in translation" moment). Premièrement: J'ai réfléchis au problèmes. Oui, avec un S car tous les utilisateurs n'ont pas les mêmes besoins. Certains ont juste besoin de partager un dossier, d'autres ont besoins de partager plusieurs dossiers et ont un laptop donc ne peuvent pas activer ces pertages partout. Certains n'ont besoin que de protéger l'écriture de fichiers, d'autres de filtrer utilisateurs par utilisateurs. Certains ont du tout logiciel libre sur le même réseau, d'autres sont entourés de matériel exclusivement Microsoft ou Apple. J'essaye de faire une interface qui répond à tout ces beoins sans faire de discrimination tout en restant le plus simple possible. Quand à la sois disante méprise des designers et développeurs: C'est faux. Je ne méprise personne. Je commence juste à être agacé d'être soit ignoré, soit contre dit avec des arguments vides de sens mais répétés sans cesse. Je fais l'effort d'écouter les critiques, quand elles sont constructives et non hostile envers une cathégorie d'utilisateur. La preuve, je modifie mes maquettes d'interfaces. Je ne dénigre personne, mais je suis agacé du comportement de certains anvers mon travail par ce que je n'ai pas l'étiquette "super designer super cool" sur le front. Ça fait des années que j'utilise des logiciels libres, que j'en fais la promotion et que j'en vente les mérites. De tout les environnements de bureau, Gnome est de loins mon préféré. Car tout en restant simple, il ne frustre pas les utilisateurs qui veulent aller plus loins. Mais depuis que je tente de joindre la communauté de Gnome, je sens comme une hostillité envers tout ce qui vas plus loins que 2 ou 3 checkbox, même quand plus d'options est nécessaire. Bref, ce n'est pas le lieux pour discuter de ça, mais il fallait que ce soit dit.
(In reply to comment #42) > Je commence juste à être agacé d'être soit ignoré Dave explained a potential reason for this already (votre façon de communiquer). > par ce que je n'ai pas l'étiquette "super designer super cool" sur le front. That is an accusation that was never expressed here. In general: Feel free to move this to a private email discussion. As you correctly said yourself, GNOME Bugzilla is not the place for this. End of generic discussions in this specific bug report, please.
Now, I work on the usage analysis. If you think it is wrong, please say it. Usage analysis. This is an analysis of the usage of the files sharing for define what user needs. If we look cases of usage, we can see 2 cases: - User to himself. - User to other users. Look at this in detail: User to himself. Place: Mainly at home. Usage: Share file from a computer to another (these two computers belong to the user). Exemple: Share documents between the desktop and the laptop. Need: Share some folders and protect them with password if the user isn't alone in the network. About folder shared: Public Folder VS Choice. Share only a folder, the ~/Public folder was the option selected in Gnome 2.XX. But request to the user to copy/move each file that he want to share in the public folder is too constraining. And request to the user to make symbolic link is worse. But allow to choose what folder user want to share is more flexible and less constraining. User to other users. Place: Home, in school/work, to house's friend(s), etc Usage: Share files with some friends. Exemple: Student share documents of a work with these friend. Some friend must modify the document and other just must read them. Need. Share some folders and protect them with password. Possibility to define rights of each user connected. About Identification: Single Password VS. User + PassWord. A single password to protect files shared might seem easier. But it's too limited when you have more than 1 user that acces to files shared. With User + PassWord you can shoose who have right to do what. You can exclude user to an access if he abuses of this acces. If you delete a sharing settings, you don't lost password that you define and other user can keep their ID (User + PassWord). And you can reuse ID in other service sharing. But this solution need to have a new type of user account. This type of user account can't connect to computer with GDM. (Like "Sharing Only" in Mac OS X) Summary: Users needs: - Possibility to share some folders - Possibility to define rights of each user connected. Note about protocols: If we using WebDav, we don't need to implement other protocols because Windows, Mac OS X and mostly GNU/Linux and xBSD are compatible with Webdav out of box.
Created attachment 180503 [details] Modified File Sharing (PNG) Implementation Analysis To match the Gnome policy, the implementation must be: - Match to user needs. - Easy and intuitive, not lead to confusion - Have an overview. - Permit to quick understand what is shared an for who. - Need minimum of mouse click. For this, I think we need 2 way for sharing files: - In Nautilius. It's the most intuitive and quick way. - In Control Center. It's permit to have an overview of each sharing. In Nautilus, how to use: For share a folder, go to their properties -> Sharing panel. For start sharing, click on ON/OFF button. By default, when you start share a folder, it have one user in the list of users allowed: Everyone. You can't remove it. For add a new user, select the '+' button on the list of users allowed. It show a popup to select user accounts. Click to create a new account for create an accont available only in File Sharing. For each users, you can chose "Read Only", "Read and Write" or "No access" right. If you click on ON/OFF button to dissable sharing, settings fot users allowed to acces to this folder are note lost. You need to click on the "Clear" button for that. In Control Center, how to use: As you can see in the mockup, it's really intuitive. Go to Control Center -> Privacy And Sharing. In this UI, you see all folders shared from your computer. For add a folder to share, click on the '+' button on the list of folders shared. It show a popup window to select which folder you want to share. By default, when you add a folder, it have one user in the list of users allowed: Everyone. You can't remove it. For add a new user, select the '+' button on the list of users allowed. It show a popup to select user accounts. Click to create a new account for create an accont available only in File Sharing. For each users, you can chose "Read Only", "Read and Write" or "No access" right.
Created attachment 180504 [details] Modified File Sharing (Inkscape SVG)
(In reply to comment #44) > Now, I work on the usage analysis. If you think it is wrong, please say it. > > Usage analysis. > > This is an analysis of the usage of the files sharing for define what user > needs. > > If we look cases of usage, we can see 2 cases: > - User to himself. > - User to other users. You seem to be focusing on file sharing. File sharing is probably the least interesting sharing there is. The important parts are: - sharing audio, video, photos through UPnP, or DAAP/DPAP (without particular focus on the technologies used). - sharing printer - sharing a drive - whether or not to allow remote access Furthermore, the sharing panel is supposed to avoid you being caught "with your pants down". Meaning that one should be able to start it, and see "what am I sharing right now". If I'm in the coffee shop, or at the office, I probably don't want to share the films I had shared with my console to show on my television (nobody wants to know that you like Glee). File sharing is pretty much a gnome-user-share that allows to select which directory to share. That's uninteresting.
(In reply to comment #47) > If I'm in the coffee shop, or at the office, I probably don't want to share the > films I had shared with my console to show on my television (nobody wants to > know that you like Glee). Agreed - this is a key requirement that I'd want to see satisfied for the design of this panel.
(In reply to comment #47) > You seem to be focusing on file sharing. File sharing is probably the least > interesting sharing there is. The important parts are: > - sharing audio, video, photos through UPnP, or DAAP/DPAP (without particular > focus on the technologies used). > - sharing printer > - sharing a drive > - whether or not to allow remote access Have you really see my work before make this review? On the left, you have the list of what is shared and not. For media (audio/video/photos), you have Media Sharing. For sharing printer, you have Printer Sharing. Etc. About this list, I an make more easy, but it join the design of AllanDay. I'm open to discuss about this, but if I make this it's better if we work together. > Furthermore, the sharing panel is supposed to avoid you being caught "with your > pants down". Meaning that one should be able to start it, and see "what am I > sharing right now". This is what my mokup do. You see all service sharing and you can quickly enable/disable each service. > If I'm in the coffee shop, or at the office, I probably don't want to share the > films I had shared with my console to show on my television (nobody wants to > know that you like Glee). See Media Sharing for that. > File sharing is pretty much a gnome-user-share that allows to select which > directory to share. That's uninteresting. My mockup allows to sellect who acces on the folder sharing and what other user can do. It's interesting.
(In reply to comment #48) > (In reply to comment #47) > > If I'm in the coffee shop, or at the office, I probably don't want to share the > > films I had shared with my console to show on my television (nobody wants to > > know that you like Glee). > > Agreed - this is a key requirement that I'd want to see satisfied for the > design of this panel. This is what my mockup do. Allan, I see your mockup on http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing (good jobs) and I see some elements that can make my mockup better. Can I copy these elements ?
(In reply to comment #47) > Furthermore, the sharing panel is supposed to avoid you being caught "with your > pants down". Meaning that one should be able to start it, and see "what am I > sharing right now". I think the ON/OFF switches for Media sharing, Printer sharing etc. would accomplish this to some extent at least. The dropdown above the list would allow you to choose between Home/Office/Public and add more profiles. I'm sure there could be a better approach though. 1. http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing
Created attachment 180630 [details] Modified Privacy and Sharing (Inkscape SVG) This is a new mockup. Always based on use cases analysis from http://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing , also based on design from Andreas Nilsson and design in this previous URL and also based on your reviews. However, there remain some unresolved questions: - Need to merge File Sharing and Media Sharing? - On Media Sharing, need to choose protocle? If yes, use a button "option" with a popup window like in Mac OS X or make on type of sharing for eahc protocol (Media Sharing by DLNA and Audio Sharing by DAAP)? Or if no, use these two protocole in same time? - If we merge File Sharing and Media Sharing and don't permit choose the protocol using, use WebDav and DLNA in same time? - What do you mean with "Provide a way to see what information about you the system has stored"? And it remain some parts: - Drive Sharing - Peer to Peer Sharing
Created attachment 180941 [details] Modified Privacy and Sharing (Inkscape SVG) Some fixs
Created attachment 183181 [details] Modified Privacy and Sharing v0.2 (Inkscape SVG) Some strings corrections and add "TV channel sharing" mockup.
Interesting! Looks like a lot of good work here... I'm not a member of the design team, but here are a few comments, if it helps: - "Share by network" doesn't mean what you think it means. ;-) It would mean "share depending on the network", so you need to say something like "Share on/over network". Same for other uses of "by". - I don't think media share should ask for the folder to share. You should just have a series of checkboxes for each type like in the mock-up, and the app should be clever enough to find the data. This means, for example, that the Rhytmbox panel would go away, and become a simple checkbox in the Media panel. For each media type, we should find what app(s) provide the relevant content, and tell them to share it, or share it directly using UPnP. If you want to provide a password, it should apply to all media types, no need to enter it several times. - Still in the Media panel, it makes no sense to show a "transcode" option for every type. I'm not sure it makes sense to show this option at all: I'm not sure when it applies, but if needed, transcoding should always happen, even if it will use resources on the server: when you want to see a shared media, you really want it to work, and don't worry about configuration details. - I'm not really convinced by the Places handling. The copy/move thing isn't very handy, and is too complex: you would need to configure a share for every place you need it with. I'd prefer to keep it simple, and consider that people will just choose where a share should be enabled - users are not sysadmins! I agree it's not easy, though. The best I can find is to add a button on every panel that would show something similar to the "Where do you want to copy these settings?" dialog. Except it wouldn't copy/move, but just decide where the share is enabled. Another solution would be to replace the ON/OFF switches with status indicators like in the first mockup at https://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing. Clicking on it could either show that dialog, which would also allow completely disabling the share, or show a popup menu to check/uncheck the available places. - Last but not least, do we really need to show a big "Device name" entry here? It's already available in the System information control panel, so we could just have a link to that panel. You'd gain much room for other widgets. And the places selection combo box could also become a link to the Network control panel, which would be shown only in the Places configuration dialog I suggested above. About your questions in comment #52: - File sharing and media sharing should stay separate IMHO. File sharing is a kind of advanced solution that won't be used by many people. Media sharing, as I described it above, is much easier to set up. - Users don't care about protocols. If we support two protocols, let's export media using two protocols if that doesn't create problems. We can't expect people to understand what DLNA is. Good luck! ;-)
(In reply to comment #55) > Interesting! Looks like a lot of good work here... > > I'm not a member of the design team, but here are a few comments, if it helps: Thank you. ;) > - "Share by network" doesn't mean what you think it means. ;-) It would mean > "share depending on the network", so you need to say something like "Share > on/over network". Same for other uses of "by". Ok, I correct that on mockup. Thanks. (English is not my first language) > - I don't think media share should ask for the folder to share. You should just > have a series of checkboxes for each type like in the mock-up, and the app > should be clever enough to find the data. This means, for example, that the > Rhytmbox panel would go away, and become a simple checkbox in the Media panel. > For each media type, we should find what app(s) provide the relevant content, > and tell them to share it, or share it directly using UPnP. If you want to > provide a password, it should apply to all media types, no need to enter it > several times. I understand your arguments and agree with. But if you want to share your copies of hollywood movies to a media-center, you don't necessarily want to share your family movies. Or if you want to share only music located in your USB key and not your music folder (/home/user/music/)? Allow to define what media you want sharing and what media you don't want sharing can by easily define with folder selection. Another solution is using future Gnome-Music and Gnome-Video application (actually talk by design team) to select exactly what media you want to share and the "Privacy and Sharing" panel allow only enable/disable this sharing. > - Still in the Media panel, it makes no sense to show a "transcode" option for > every type. I'm not sure it makes sense to show this option at all: I'm not > sure when it applies, but if needed, transcoding should always happen, even if > it will use resources on the server: when you want to see a shared media, you > really want it to work, and don't worry about configuration details. Transcode is only necessary with DLNA protocol if the client don't support other format that MPEG-2, MP3 and Jpeg. I don't know if with DLNA the client can say to server if it need transcode or not, but if it can't, I think is a bad idea to transcode all media even if the client software don't need this. I think we need an opinion of a DLNA expert or read the specification of this protocol. > - I'm not really convinced by the Places handling. The copy/move thing isn't > very handy, and is too complex: you would need to configure a share for every > place you need it with. I'd prefer to keep it simple, and consider that people > will just choose where a share should be enabled - users are not sysadmins! > > I agree it's not easy, though. The best I can find is to add a button on every > panel that would show something similar to the "Where do you want to copy these > settings?" dialog. Except it wouldn't copy/move, but just decide where the > share is enabled. Another solution would be to replace the ON/OFF switches with > status indicators like in the first mockup at > https://live.gnome.org/Design/SystemSettings/PrivacyAndSharing. Clicking on it > could either show that dialog, which would also allow completely disabling the > share, or show a popup menu to check/uncheck the available places. Agree with this. We can relate the place with the activation button of sharing. But in this case, the "On/Off" button need to move from the left list to the "options of sharing" section like in the mockup you referred. And we can't continue to enable/disable sharing with only on clock. Another solution is to simply add a "Places" button. But it would not be understandable by the user. I continue to think about this but i'm agree with you. > - Last but not least, do we really need to show a big "Device name" entry here? > It's already available in the System information control panel, so we could > just have a link to that panel. You'd gain much room for other widgets. And the > places selection combo box could also become a link to the Network control > panel, which would be shown only in the Places configuration dialog I suggested > above. Yes: When I begin this mockup, the "System Information" panel can't change the name of the device. So, now it's not necessary to continue to allow this. > About your questions in comment #52: > - File sharing and media sharing should stay separate IMHO. File sharing is a > kind of advanced solution that won't be used by many people. Media sharing, as > I described it above, is much easier to set up. > - Users don't care about protocols. If we support two protocols, let's export > media using two protocols if that doesn't create problems. We can't expect > people to understand what DLNA is. > > Good luck! ;-) Thanks for your review. ;) I work to apply your comment to the mockup and share it when it's done.
Thanks for the bug report. This particular bug has already been reported into our bug tracking system, but please feel free to report any further bugs you find. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 687772 ***