Some things that could be improved in the abrt ui: - The statusicon should not blink, that is just annoying - Don't use the generic GTK+ warning icon, instead find some more specific icon - The "CC has detected a crash. Do you want to open the crash analyzer..." [Yes/No] dialog is not helpful. The user already clicked on the icon, so you can assume that he wants to see the details and just open the main gui. - The main gui should either be a real dialog (which would be better for a report-this-crash type ui). In that case, it should loose the menubar and have the buttons in the action area at the bottom of the dialog. Or it should be a real crash-report-management application, in which case the list of crashes is good, but the buttons should be a real toolbar instead. - Also, never make the menubar insensitive. - "Do you really want to quit" dialogs are generally annoying and should be avoided.
Hi, thanks for the comments on gui, I've fixed all the issues in git except the icon type - which I'll do when I find some suitable replacement. Jirka
If you need a specific icon, it is always possible to send a mail to mlanglie (or ux-dept, I guess) and ask for it.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 11 development cycle. Changing version to '11'. More information and reason for this action is here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Another icon that needs to be improved is the warning icon that you show in the statusicon when a crash happens. Currently it is just the stock GTK+ warning icon. Showing that in the notification area is not good, since it doesn't give a clear indication what it is about. You should get a more specifically core-dump-related icon made.
the request for icons is here: https://fedorahosted.org/design-team/ticket/38
dup 524349 says: Crash description field should word-wrap Horizontal scrolling is the worst UI disaster possible.
*** Bug 524349 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 497600 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
from 523817: Today a pulseaudio crashed when running from a Test Day LiveCD. Abrt icon shows up, good. I click on it, GUI pops up, great. I see an item saying pulseaudio, I see "Not reported" sign, nice. But how to report it? No big button anywhere. Right click on the item - nothing happens. Looking at the system menu - nothing there. There is one option left - the icon with the (probably) save icon. What does it do? No tooltip, no name, nothing! Ok, I will risk that, it's just a livecd. I click it, heart pounding. Long time waiting and watching dialog where the last line is always cut off, not really seeing much. "Report" screen pops up. I write a long comment what I did before it crashed. The dialog does not wrap words so it's a very long single line, I have to constantly scroll left and right. Hit Send and confirm all warnings. I get an error message saying I have not filled in my bugzilla account credentials. It hadn't asked! On top of that, at the bottom there is a line "This crash has been reported, you can find the report(s) at:"... and that's all, rest is blank. So was it reported or not? Weird. Alright, what now? After a while I find Bugzilla plugin in Preferences, so I enter my credentials. The Apply and Cancel button are swapped, therefore I hit Cancel unintentionally to confirm it. Argh. Ok, I fill it again, this time pressing Apply. I press the green button again to report the bug again. Oh my god, my previous comment is lost. F**k! So much time spent on writing it. Alright, what I wouldn't do for the community. I write the comment once more. I hit Send, Yes, Yes and the bug is finally reported. Oof! Guys! Developers, developers, developers! :) Try to look at it also from an end-user perspective! I had feelings like tearing the software to pieces, what about them? They will probably end at the green button hesitation. I believe I don't have to report you single bugs for all problems described in the text, you can surely extract them from it.
*** Bug 523817 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
from 525851: Abrt has a bad popup-heavy ui When you try to send a crash it fires a series of popups (do you really want to do x or y). They should be inlined like the firefox yellow bars with the possibility to make the choices sticky
*** Bug 525851 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
from 506631: Applications->System Tools->A.B.R.T does not have an icon. It should.
*** Bug 506631 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
From 526072: Currently ABRT shows a /!\ icon in the tray if applications crash. This does not really tell the user what happened. Also, other apps also use the same icon (device-kit I think).
*** Bug 526072 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Created attachment 364930 [details] Missing ABRT menu icon.png Not sure if you are still tracking this issue, but the abrt menu icon appears to still be missing as of abrt-0.0.9-2.fc12.i686.
Yes, we are tracking it, so far we have a new status icon, which is not usable as menu icon. Jirka
(In reply to comment #11) > from 525851: > > Abrt has a bad popup-heavy ui > > When you try to send a crash it fires a series of popups (do you really want to > do x or y). They should be inlined like the firefox yellow bars with the > possibility to make the choices sticky Yeah, it took me about 10 popups to file my first report. Sometimes the one I needed to enter information for was hidden under earlier dialogs, so I had to move windows out of the way to get at the one I needed. There were so many popups that it was very hard to figure out what I was doing.
(In reply to comment #18) > Yes, we are tracking it, so far we have a new status icon, which is not usable > as menu icon. Jirka, is this something you'd envision completing for F-12 final?
I've added the menu icon, I'll change the trayicon i next update.
*** Bug 555378 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
From dup 555378: Please forgive this overly general criticism, but I feel that the ABRT UI is in need of a full redesign, involving a User Interaction expert. The entire GUI seems to be structured around implementation details of the application, rather than around the experience of the user, and I feel that the app could be significantly improved with a full redesign of the UI. To try to make this more concrete: if I go to the "Edit" menu, the first item is "Plugins", which brings up a dialog for editing plugins. This dialog appears to directly expose inner workings of the application, from the perspective of implementation. As someone who merely uses the app, the dialog seems to me to be confusing to read, and extremely visually "busy"; it is essentially a collection of Enable/Disable checkboxes, but they are hidden in a fog of widgetry relating to the plugin infrastructure. Next, the "Preferences" item: this brings up a dialog named "Global Settings", and all of the options here appear to me to be "deep" implementation-level config: practically the first option is "Database backend" with an option to change from a SQLite3 backend to... no other possible options, and so it goes on. None of the options are documented inline with the UI and there is no online help. However, I'm not sure that any of these configurations settings should even appear in the GUI. Similarly, when reporting a bug, all information is brought up in a 3-column list view, "Send", "Item", "Value", which appears to reflect the implementation details of how you're assembling reports. Unfortunately this view is hard to figure out: individual rows vary greatly in height, making it difficult to see which checkbox in the "Send" column corresponds to the items in the other columns. I have privacy and security concerns about sending certain information in certain reports, and it is difficult for me to quickly ascertain what information will be sent. There appears to be no way to selectively anonymize parts of the report that are sent. Basic navigation within this view can be difficult; some rows can be many hundreds of pixels high, and it's hard to see where rows begin and end, and if there are two rows hiding a third row between them that might e.g. contain password information. I think the deeper issue here is to decide who the target users of this application are. I believe that the design of this application needs to contain a statement of "personas" describing people who would use the application; see e.g. http://www.user.com/personas.htm I believe that the application needs at least three personas: (a) a persona evoking a non-computerese user of the system, who's self-administering the system (e.g. a small businessman using OO.org spreadsheets who encounters a crash) (b) a persona evoking a sysadmin who is managing systems on behalf of others (either desktops, or headless servers) and trying to deal with the problems they encounter, be it due to bugs in the software, local/site-specific issues (e.g. "their intranet's down"), user-error, or malicious activity. (c) a persona evoking the maintainer who's receiving the bug reports and working with (a) and (b). We have resources both within the Fedora community: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/design-team and within Red Hat itself who can help with this kind of design. CCing duffy who knows how to contact such resources.
*** Bug 552916 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
From dup 552916: abrt-gui doesn't follow standard desktop behaviour: 1. It is not possible to select multiple items from the abrt-gui window 2. It is not possible to use the delete key to delete items that are selected
*** Bug 541853 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
From dup 541853: Items in abrt gui are not sorted. I would expect them to be sorted by the Date column (showing last occurrence of the crash I suppose). It is not even possible to click on the column to sort them manually. This way it is very hard to navigate in the list and for example see what latest crashes were caught. Please sort the list by default or allow manual sorting.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 11 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 11. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '11'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 11's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 11 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Fedora 11 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2010-06-25. Fedora 11 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.
Reopening; marking Version as F13
This message is a reminder that Fedora 13 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 13. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '13'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior to Fedora 13's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 13 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Fedora 13 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2011-06-25. Fedora 13 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.
Reopening, marking version as rawhide again
This package has changed ownership in the Fedora Package Database. Reassigning to the new owner of this component.
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 19 development cycle. Changing version to '19'. (As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 19 development cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 19 End Of Life. Thank you.) More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora19
This UI review doesn't apply to the new abrt ui -> closing