ERPNext Foundation ERPNext Cloud User Manual Blog Discuss Frappé* Donate

Poll - Removing Desk


#10

So this is meant V12 desk can be customized (customizable) via custom app ( sth like wordpress template ) ? Just install app, choose desk format and it works?


#11

#12

I agree with @magic-overflow Give people options to choose from. At the end of the day, everyone will get to use the design that brings the best results.

Sometimes, the more the options, the better it is - @Ernest_Ofosu


#13

it a good idea to change but what if we have both and everyone has a chance to which to use if possible?


#14

Splitting the desk off into it’s own app does not work for anyone on ERPNext hosting. So not best for everyone.

Voting is a great way for decision making, which is why nearly every government in the world has some method in place for doing so.

By it’s nature, voting gives a voice to those with ‘skin in the game.’ Arbitrary decision making does not.

This goes back to my original idea of splitting ERPNext into a platform with installable apps. However, there needs to be some sort of Frappe version of an app store to automate installs, and to allow installation on a hosted server, something like this:

https://oasis.sandstorm.io/


#15

I would like to comment on this desk.

  1. I think Desk is good for shortcut (favourite, most used, or just a collection of whatever icons a user wants).
  2. On the other hand, having too many icons is confusing. I ended up only using the “collection icons” (Accounts, Buying, Selling, etc.)
  3. And still most of the time I just click the Explore icons and proceed from the sidebar.
  4. Unfortunately, the sidebar can only be sorted by alphabet. So adding more apps or domains, or (in many cases) after changing the language, it can be confusing to find the correct menu in the new order.

So, my take on this matter are:

  1. Keep the Desk but make it group-able. Icons are grouped by their parent modules or domains (icons grouped in Accounts, Selling, etc. and Manufacturing, Educations, etc.)
  2. Make the same with the sidebar menu according to:
    • domain: Manufacturing, Education, Hospitality, etc.
    • modules: Accounts, Selling, Buying, etc.
    • tools: Tools, Contacts, etc.
    • settings: Setup, Settings. etc.
    • support: Website, Help/Learn, etc.

This way there is hierarchy to help user navigating the whole application.


[Version 12] Killing the iconic desktop
#16

Woah, if this is government, hope you are paying your taxes. :slight_smile:

I hope you are realising you are trying to control someone else’s labour.

The right attitude should be: we love the existing desk, we will commit x hours of labour per week to support issues in the desk. Or here is the equivalent amount.

Voting in the poll is not “skin in the game”. Skin in the game is when you are spending hundreds or thousands of hours in building a community software.

You need to find a more convincing argument, or some volunteers who are interested in maintaining the desk!


#17

Woah, if this is government, hope you are paying your taxes. :slight_smile:

I hope you are realising you are trying to control someone else’s labour.

I’m talking about decision making within governments. Not the public voting officials into office.

The right attitude should be: we love the existing desk, we will commit x hours of labour per week to support issues in the desk. Or here is the equivalent amount.

The open pull request for the desk improvements already shows that point.

Voting in the poll is not “skin in the game”. Skin in the game is when you are spending hundreds or thousands of hours in building a community software.

If someone hasn’t voted in the poll that’s spent hundreds of hours building something, then they must not care about that issue. Furthermore, you coming out with just some random decision to drastically change the UI doesn’t give them a voice!

You need to find a more convincing argument, or some volunteers who are interested in maintaining the desk!

The desk cannot be maintained if you remove it from the software. If you keep it in, improvements must be approved by you, which you seem unwilling to do. Again, there’s an open pull request for improvements to this software that you are refusing to pull because it’s not what you want to do! This isn’t a matter of how will it be maintained. It’s a matter of you won’t allow it to be maintained.


#18

Desk 2.0 does not solve any of the problems that we are trying to solve here. I have already replied, so won’t repeat.

We (current maintainers) have no interest in maintaining the current desk once the new design is merged. If you have the bandwidth, do let us know - I am talking about Desk 1.0 not 2.0.

Edit: Will avoid replying unless there is a new point here (so that we don’t go in loops).


#19

In the broader scheme, this conversation seems like it might discourage future pull requests and innovation from the community. What is the appropriate mechanism for independent developers to determine if their contribution will be seriously considered before investing time in development?


#20

The Foundation might help to relieve and resolve such issues. But at present that body and support of governance is stalled. As bigger players step up, the Foundation will assume a leadership and stabilizing role. Money talks…


#21

Here is a starting point: https://github.com/frappe/erpnext/wiki/Contribution-Guidelines

Specifically: https://github.com/frappe/erpnext/wiki/Preparing-a-Contribution-Proposal


#22

This is a very cynical comment. The work is open source, the entire process is transparent on GitHub. Help is given for free. I am not sure what more can I personally do to get things moving. People who are contributing are unfortunately not the ones spending time on the forum clarifying issues.

Contributions have to reach a certain threshold to be acceptable, that is decided not by polling, but by maintainers. Hard product decisions will have to be taken. There is full freedom to fork the project if you think there is a better governance model. As a long time maintainer, participating in such discussions is nothing but a drain of energy and such a huge disappointment.

No wonder open source maintainers face a burnout, no wonder I spend less and less time on this forum.


#23

You have interesting points. I am sure you must have thought of the design before you announced the change. But at the same time it seems a lot of effort has gone into desk 2.0. It will definitely be good to interact and come up with what is best of both. In the thread for desk 2 I saw a interesting benchmark with an odoo fork. We can also learn things from others. It helps us to become better.

You have a good vision about the project, but others also want it to succeed. That’s why they are putting in effort to make it better. Belittling their effort or vision does not help. Discussing ideas help and I believe an open discussion about the requirements and proposed solution will help.

As far as the choosing the correct option is concerned, one way may be to put in demo sites for the three options and users can then give their feedback on both the design. We will have to include users who may not be technically saavy. They are the ones whom the new design would have to be sold as they are the one from whom the biggest push back will come.

-Amit


#24

Somebody made a suggestion in another thread that the new hierarchical sidebar be implemented. and have (possibly a more compacted) iconic floating toolbar when the user clicks on the “E” logo.

This might be a great compromise, even if it serves as a transitional tool between V11 and V13.

Reference : [Version 12] Killing the iconic desktop


#25

Rushabh,

Forgive me and please accept that I mean no ill intent, nor question your motives or leadership to cause you consternation here!

You have my heartfelt respect and sincere admiration. I recognize and truly appreciate your Frappe team’s tireless and selfless work to sustain this venture for all to benefit.

My misunderstanding is what process sets the product direction, that is specifically how and what applies to nurture and evaluate contributions like Desk 2.0, to accept or reject these in the end.

To me it seems fair to say Frappe together with each product module maintainer group share this heavy lift work and serious decision responsibility.

The Foundation, presumably once it develops, will share in this critical role too, to evaluate and adjudicate, and provide support and relief, of some means to fairly resolve unenviable cases like this.

Any cynicism on my part I truly regret and stand corrected thanks.

John


#26

Crap. I am on the fence. I like the new desk. It is clean and functional.
However, I really do like the icon option, and had gotten used to it.
I do believe that hierarchy based navigation is essential for Entrepeneurs, but some functions do require an additional Icon.
I will support getting rid of the desk and towards the new functional hierarchy approach. Then, perhaps users can build customized nav solutions on top if they are so inclined. I have found the hierarchical methods of Frappe quite useful in running my business.


#27

@clarkej I have a lot of respect for you and your contributions, so please feel free to be real. We are not praise junkies or people who need an ego massage :sweat_smile: . We would rather hope to be treated fairly than go from one extreme to another.

When these comments are made, please consider the extensive contribution guidelines available to developers, the hundreds of community pull requests that are reviewed each month and all the maintenance that goes with it.

Also please realize that expecting one person to review everything at this scale is putting too much pressure. While I agree I did not respond to the contribution (to be fair its only been a month), no one else reviewed it either. So if you are setting standards, please be fair rather than cynical.

Edit: The call for reviewers has been open since September 2017. Those who are feeling the pain of Desk 2.0 should strongly consider the other side.


#28

If there is a mechanism to collect data of icon clicks vs Search-CTRL+G vs direct access to the doctypes, it will give a more objective idea based on existing user navigation preferences (Not Administrator/System Manager role).

This navigation data once reviewed, will allow to all of us to pitch in the responses.

As of now, I have read that usability / front desk “selling” to the users & management is assisted by the use of “similar to iPad” pitch when the first login and set of Desk icons is demoed.


#29

I guess it’s official now?

The Desk is dead. Long live the Desk.