Re: Connect to Server dialog

[Bryan Clark <bclark redhat com>]

Hey Calum ~

On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 16:57 +0100, Calum Benson wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-07-13 at 16:21, Jamie McCracken wrote:
> > I would prefer the word "service" as its generic enough and not too
> > technical a word.
> 
> Yep, that's a decent suggestion too.

Service could work  I'm not keen on any of them really, but it probably
beats protocol. :)

> > I would prefer it if username field was hidden initially and only come
> > into play if its relevant (ie as you say after choosing the other
> > stuff). Some services might not require a username as such? 
> 
> True, although jumping dialogs aren't very pleasant... perhaps just
> greying it out would be sufficient.

Having the entry come and go wouldn't be ideal.  Just always asking for
a username and pre-filling it with your username is our best play for
this situation.  Making the entry insensitive is an option for those
services we know don't require one... like below.  Where host keys are
used, there's just no good way to be smart about that, we might as well
include the username and try to outsmart ourselves.

> > It would be nice if "Anonymous FTP" and "FTP" both appeared as separate
> > services with (as stated above) the username field remaining hidden if
> > the former is selected. That way it should avoid over complicating
> > things (I hope!).
> 
> That's not a bad idea, although it does still kind of require the user
> to know what "Anonymous FTP" is... maybe they could be called something
> else, though, like "FTP (without username)" and "FTP (with username)" or
> something.  But hopefully something better, because they look too
> similar to each other :)

Hmm... Tough wording to figure out, but probably a good option to have.

> > Incidentally I did not see an entry for password - is there a reason for
> > that? (it should be hidden as per username)
> 
> Yeah, I guess the password dialog (including any keyring options) is
> intended to pop up separately as required... would be good to see this
> clarified though.

I saw the JDS dialog had text explaining that the password will be asked
for later.  I think this could be a good addition. 


The things I wanted to improve most were the 
	Folder: None	<-- This is not so obvious what's going on
	Anonymous FTP	<-- Needs some improvement
	Password Later?	<-- A hint that the password will be asked for
				or just integrating the key-ring manager

I think moving the protocol field down makes it confusing for anonymous
connections where we might make the username entry insensitive.

I liked how the JDS dialog has the [Browse] next to the Server field,
however I want a better indicator of what the chosen folder is after a
user has browsed for it.  Placing it in the Server entry as 'hostname/
folder' just doesn't work for me.

Anyway, those are some thoughts.

Cheers,
~ Bryan