Mikko - maybe you could make up your own guidelines? And I'm sure mf would love to include your best thoughts into the Icon Submission document.
I really don't see any personal in the guidelines, except for that they are kind of strict. But providing example - do you want to commit ugly hacks into the kernel, or get a good patch done (though it requires a little more time usually)?
Please don't take this into personal "mf vs. crappish" fight again. Provide constructive critic, provide ideas...
WBR, Aleksey Bragin.
On Oct 16, 2005, at 3:31 AM, Mikko Tikkanen wrote:
Well, quite frankly, you could do that a WHOLE lot nicer way. If you have to state publicly that if you are not professional stay away or get bashed then you are heading the wrong way. You could have wrote simple instructions for the people wanting to help, instead you wrote how good you are, how much you have done and how you are going to bash anyone who tries to submit anything. No matter how I watch that it just isn't constructive. You could have proposed something like icon submission board where certain people could just vote if they like certain icon or not, ergo making your life easier, but again you didn't.. You just decided to bash the people who are TRYING to help.
Now, on to the trashcan: No, I am not talking about looks. I think they look ok for now. To be more on the point, that is the same exact mistake Apple did while ago. (Yes, they make mistakes) The problem here lies in psychology; The trashcan displays an state of immediate explosion even though single text document would be placed in it, so natural response would be to empty the trash hence disabling the very function of trash can: undo. Plus, it changes the single step function (delete) to two step function (delete, empty trash).
-mikko
ros-general mailing list ros-general@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-general