Bug #10997

Document GNOME Tweak Tool

Added by sajolida 2016-01-26 09:36:49 . Updated 2016-06-17 08:38:30 .

Status:
Rejected
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Target version:
Start date:
2016-01-26
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Feature Branch:
Type of work:
End-user documentation
Blueprint:

Starter:
1
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

It probably make sense to at least mention it in the introduction to GNOME.


Subtasks


Related issues

Blocked by Tails - Feature #11237: Consider removing GNOME Tweak Tool Resolved 2016-03-14

History

#1 Updated by spriver 2016-02-09 16:43:07

  • Assignee set to spriver

#2 Updated by emmapeel 2016-03-12 12:18:07

Not sure if we should document or fix the non-working Tweak Tool options, like

Power Button Action [When Laptop Lid is Closed]

#3 Updated by spriver 2016-03-12 13:11:19

emmapeel wrote:
> Not sure if we should document or fix the non-working Tweak Tool options, like
>
> Power Button Action [When Laptop Lid is Closed]

There is already a ticket about the lid issue: Bug #11052 Do not suspend when closing lid

There are several other things not working (e.g. start programs - but we can’t fix that I think). I’ll try to collect all not working ones. Maybe we should document that some thing cannot be configured by the tool and that some have bugs?

#4 Updated by intrigeri 2016-03-12 14:17:37

My 2 cts: I’m starting to wonder if it’s a good idea to ship this tool in the first place, if it’s not working properly and as a consequence the cost of writing/reviewing/translating/maintaining the doc this ticket is about grows this much. Advanced users who might need Tweak Tool will find & install it somehow, and won’t be looking in our “introduction to the GNOME desktop” doc.

#5 Updated by sajolida 2016-03-12 16:22:18

I didn’t mean to document Tweak Tool in depth nor to list everything that works or doesn’t work from it. I often see Tweak Tool as an extension of System Settings (when I don’t find something in System Settings I go in Tweak Tool) so I thought it might be nice to mention it as much as we do for System Settings; which is basically just saying that it exists.

Regarding keeping Tweak Tool or not, I have no strong opinion. Maybe checking which settings in Tweak Tool are more likely to be changed by our users in the context of Tails would help us make a decision.

I personally use it everyday to activate additional extensions because doing so from the command line is unreliable. But I could perfectly have it in my additional software.

#6 Updated by spriver 2016-03-12 22:28:02

I never had the urge to use GNOME Tweak Tool (except for the dark theme), but I’m not a poweruser of GNOME (the defaults are enough for me). And I don’t know if users out there are actually using it since the settings have to be redone after every restart. But I agree that the Tweak Tool is some sort of extension to the basic system settings and useful. How basically are such decisions made? Just remove something and see if users are complaining?

Another option we could do: refer to the tool and that users can install it into the persistent storage and what it does basically. And warn the users that we don’t support it and maybe some features are not working within Tails (since most of the things is working)?

#7 Updated by sajolida 2016-03-14 16:41:59

#8 Updated by sajolida 2016-03-14 16:42:01

I think we should either:

  • Keep GNOME Tweak Tool and mention it as much as we do for System Settings.
  • Remove GNOME Tweak Tool and not mention it at all. It is still quite complicated to configure persistent additional software so if we believe GNOME Tweak Tool is not useful enough to be in Tails by default, let’s save us some work and not document it.

I created Feature #11237 to discuss this. Marking this ticket as blocked by this new one.

#9 Updated by spriver 2016-06-17 03:11:21

  • Status changed from Confirmed to Resolved
  • Assignee deleted (spriver)

Since Feature #11237 is resolved and the tool got removed I’m closing this ticket, or shall we document GNOME Tweak Tool nevertheless? (IMO we should not)

#10 Updated by sajolida 2016-06-17 08:38:30

  • Status changed from Resolved to Rejected

Exactly, I think this should be rejected without further ado. Thanks for cleaning up!