sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Jaka Kranjc <smgl AT lynxlynx.info>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results
- Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2008 00:29:38 +0200
Fresh users keep confusing sorcery commands up and some of the experienced
users occasionally complain about that too. So me and my friend S. A. (a HCI
student) have made an usability study on how to improve the situation. We
realised that the simplest thing to do would be to shorten the command names,
so they consume less biomemory, save you from RSI and give you more time for
other unimportant stuff.
Implementation notes
The proposed fix is to implement wrapper scripts (since aliases don't work
everywhere) with the mentioned user-friendly names. The scripts would be put
into /sbin, so they'd work even if you had /usr mounted on an unreachable
network share or otherwise unavailable. When your system is in dire need of
assistance, it is really annoying if things you are used to working with
don't work anymore (a double annoyance).
So here is the sorted initial list of the shortcuts and what they woud run:
cc - cast --queue (who can spell queue anyway?)
cp - cleanse --prune
dd - dispel --downgrade
gs - gaze search
gv - gaze version
sg - sorcery upgrade
sh - sorcery hold
sq - sorcery -q
su - scribe update
As you can see, the list contains only the most frequently used
(sub)commands,
so feel free to suggest more. I also do realise that 'su' could be thought of
as 'sorcery update', but since the latter is used less often, scribe has
precedence. Maybe 'sup' or 'soup' would do?
The code is already in my repository, I'm just waiting for your comments,
mages, so I can finalize it to perfection.
LP
--
We cannot command nature except by obeying her. --Sir Francis Bacon
Have a sourcerous day! www.sourcemage.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-
[SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Jaka Kranjc, 03/31/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
flux, 03/31/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Ladislav Hagara, 03/31/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Eric K Sandall, 03/31/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
seth, 03/31/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results, Eric K Sandall, 03/31/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
seth, 03/31/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results, Ismael Luceno, 03/31/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Eric K Sandall, 03/31/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
Ladislav Hagara, 03/31/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] RFC: sorcery usabilty study results,
flux, 03/31/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.