-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Two versions of Control Center #1077
Comments
I would not make this a two version thing but make it modal. You can hide things in the background and have a setting to control that. By default things can be hidden to keep things simple and not confuse users. The option can be there to enable it in the foreground where users can see them like the peer building terminal etc. |
Agreed, one version. I would so that the default state (the "simple" version) shows steps in the process, progress bars, countdown timer if possible, so that user knows that things are moving forward, is informed of progress, does not panic if it takes too long. Then an "advanced" control would expand the dialog to show more info - not sure if this is possible, but is there something like a terminal viewer where they could watch the action scroll past, and scroll back up to check things if needed? |
@erkin97 what do you think? |
I've sketched out that idea. It's in the updated Axure link I just sent to you on Slack, Alex. (The second link, for some reason.) |
Discussion is closed. |
Some comments from Slack: Also this Components thing should change where it is modal: (1) current implementation is advanced mode, (2) default simple mode should show capabilities that you can install to have groups of things like (web client, desktop client, peer management). Checking off one will install the set of things needed for it. This will be much easier for users. |
There is a threat that users in the future might get confused and scared with all those terminals and code lines.
Therefore, there is way to make two versions of Control Central:
So, is there a need for us to implement it?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: