Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
To all concerned developers, As you may or may not be aware, the name "System Settings" for an application is currently in use by KDE. A recent renaming by your GNOME control center developers to this name creates a naming conflict. This naming conflict will cause severe problems for users as a result. It will also cause problems for those members of the KDE Community supporting the usage of KDE applications on GNOME, as it will not be possible to adjust the settings used by KDE applications. This will be because they will both appear, leading to GNOME packagers stupidly patching the system to not show the KDE System Settings under GNOME. As KDE occupied this name first, it is ours as a result, and I will NOT be relinquishing it to satisfy your personal (selfish) desires, which will cause numerous problems for users on both sides. System Settings cannot just be shown on KDE, as the application is used to configure multiple settings shared between KDE applications such as Localisation (language, region, currency, calendar), Style, Colours, Fonts among others. As KDE System Settings maintainer, I request that you immediately rename it once again to another name which is not in conflict. Regards, Ben Cooksley KDE System Settings Maintainer
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Friday, July 22, 2011 04:21:14 AM Ben Cooksley wrote: > To all concerned developers, > > As you may or may not be aware, the name "System Settings" for an > application is currently in use by KDE. A recent renaming by your > GNOME control center developers to this name creates a naming > conflict. This naming conflict will cause severe problems for users as > a result. It will also cause problems for those members of the KDE > Community supporting the usage of KDE applications on GNOME, as it > will not be possible to adjust the settings used by KDE applications. > > This will be because they will both appear, leading to GNOME > packagers stupidly patching the system to not show the KDE System > Settings under GNOME. > > As KDE occupied this name first, it is ours as a result, and I will > NOT be relinquishing it to satisfy your personal (selfish) desires, > which will cause numerous problems for users on both sides. > System Settings cannot just be shown on KDE, as the application is > used to configure multiple settings shared between KDE applications > such as Localisation (language, region, currency, calendar), Style, > Colours, Fonts among others. > > As KDE System Settings maintainer, I request that you immediately > rename it once again to another name which is not in conflict. This is not just a theoretical concern see https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/kde-workspace/+bug/735166 Thanks to your mail here, I knew how to respond. Scott K
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 08:21:14PM +1200, Ben Cooksley wrote: > As KDE occupied this name first, it is ours as a result, and I will > NOT be relinquishing it to satisfy your personal (selfish) desires, > which will cause numerous problems for users on both sides. Always nice to meet a fellow free desktop developer. Please be aware that no harm is meant. However, your tone is not what we're used to. Our mailing lists are moderated and though you can disagree all you want, please always show some respect. See for instance https://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct Now lets go into something more productive and perhaps we can fix this before the sunny Desktop Summit. -- Regards, Olav (moderator)
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
> > Now lets go into something more productive and perhaps we can fix this > before the sunny Desktop Summit. Hi Olav, In terms of being productive surrounding this, I have several questions: Screenshots on your live wiki indicate that GNOME developers were aware of the use of the "System Settings" name by KDE. Why did your developers deliberately proceed with the use of this name, knowing it would cause a conflict? (This was the primary reason why I was particularly angry about the discovery of your use of this name) Is there any reason why it cannot be renamed once more as soon as is possible so that the next release your team makes fixes this issue? I would prefer to resolve this issue as soon as possible, to minimise the work packagers will inevitably do to block KDE System Settings under GNOME, and the resulting KDE application user support issues that will arise. Regards, Ben Cooksley KDE System Settings Maintainer
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 22 July 2011 17:17, Ben Cooksley wrote: >> >> Now lets go into something more productive and perhaps we can fix this >> before the sunny Desktop Summit. > > Hi Olav, > > In terms of being productive surrounding this, I have several questions: > > Screenshots on your live wiki indicate that GNOME developers were > aware of the use of the "System Settings" name by KDE. Why did your > developers deliberately proceed with the use of this name, knowing it > would cause a conflict? (This was the primary reason why I was > particularly angry about the discovery of your use of this name) > > Is there any reason why it cannot be renamed once more as soon as is > possible so that the next release your team makes fixes this issue? > > I would prefer to resolve this issue as soon as possible, to minimise > the work packagers will inevitably do to block KDE System Settings > under GNOME, and the resulting KDE application user support issues > that will arise. > > Regards, > Ben Cooksley > KDE System Settings Maintainer To be more specific about the problem, installing kde-workspace to a GNOME installation results in 2 indistinguishable apps named System Settings and 2 named System Monitor. On Ubuntu at least, if I want the GNOME version, I have to remember to click the first System Monitor but the second System Setting which is awfully frustrating. Here's a screenshot from my Ubuntu install: https://launchpadlibrarian.net/75745040/Gnome%20Shell%20screnshot.png GNOME happily has the OnlyShowIn:Gnome,Unity key set for gnome-control-center but KDE is unwilling to do the same because that is the only way to change important preferences that affect KDE apps in general. I'd like to suggest that the GNOME developers consider changing the public name of their app to "System Preferences." This matches the Mac OS X design and arguably GNOME follows some parts of OS X design. Furthermore, it is more in line with Gnome 2's System>Preferences and System>Administration. I suspect GNOME developers would rather users not install KDE apps, but that's a narrow viewpoint. As one example, GNOME has no equivalent to the educational suite that kdeedu provides. I also don't think GNOME was intentionally malicious in choosing their app's new name but it is creating an interoperability issue that ought to be resolved. Jeremy Bicha
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 17:53 -0400, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On 22 July 2011 17:17, Ben Cooksley wrote: > >> > >> Now lets go into something more productive and perhaps we can fix this > >> before the sunny Desktop Summit. > > > > Hi Olav, > > > > In terms of being productive surrounding this, I have several questions: > > > > Screenshots on your live wiki indicate that GNOME developers were > > aware of the use of the "System Settings" name by KDE. Why did your > > developers deliberately proceed with the use of this name, knowing it > > would cause a conflict? (This was the primary reason why I was > > particularly angry about the discovery of your use of this name) > > > > Is there any reason why it cannot be renamed once more as soon as is > > possible so that the next release your team makes fixes this issue? > > > > I would prefer to resolve this issue as soon as possible, to minimise > > the work packagers will inevitably do to block KDE System Settings > > under GNOME, and the resulting KDE application user support issues > > that will arise. > > > > Regards, > > Ben Cooksley > > KDE System Settings Maintainer > > To be more specific about the problem, installing kde-workspace to a > GNOME installation results in 2 indistinguishable apps named System > Settings and 2 named System Monitor. On Ubuntu at least, if I want the > GNOME version, I have to remember to click the first System Monitor > but the second System Setting which is awfully frustrating. Here's a > screenshot from my Ubuntu install: > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/75745040/Gnome%20Shell%20screnshot.png > > GNOME happily has the OnlyShowIn:Gnome,Unity key set for > gnome-control-center but KDE is unwilling to do the same because that > is the only way to change important preferences that affect KDE apps > in general. > > I'd like to suggest that the GNOME developers consider changing the > public name of their app to "System Preferences." This matches the Mac > OS X design and arguably GNOME follows some parts of OS X design. > Furthermore, it is more in line with Gnome 2's System>Preferences and > System>Administration. I very much doubt users will be any less confused when confronted with "System Settings" and "System Preferences". We should work on shared groundwork so that our settings are interoperable. If a user has to set his language in two different applications just because he happens to use applications written in two different toolkits, we have failed miserably. However, if the here-and-now requires this duplication, then I don't think it's right for any application to use a generic name outside its target desktop. Having the KDE System Settings show up as just "System Settings" under GNOME is confusing to GNOME users. Just as it would be confusing if I made Yelp show up as "Help" in KDE. There's a very easy way to use a different application name under different desktops. Just install two .desktop files. One looks like this: Name=System Settings OnlyShowIn=KDE The other looks like this: Name=KDE System Settings NotShowIn=KDE You just can't expect to own generic names across desktops. -- Shaun
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 23/07/11 00:25, Shaun McCance wrote: I very much doubt users will be any less confused when confronted with "System Settings" and "System Preferences". Especially as in other languages, there are not always two words for this (e.g. German). There's a very easy way to use a different application name under different desktops. Just install two .desktop files. One looks like this: Name=System Settings OnlyShowIn=KDE The other looks like this: Name=KDE System Settings NotShowIn=KDE That seems to solve the language problem.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
2011/7/23 Matthias Clasen : >> I'd like to suggest that the GNOME developers consider changing the >> public name of their app to "System Preferences." This matches the Mac >> OS X design and arguably GNOME follows some parts of OS X design. >> Furthermore, it is more in line with Gnome 2's System>Preferences and >> System>Administration. > > That is an absurd proposal. What next, rename gnome-terminal to > 'Commandline Window' because Xfce also ships a 'Terminal' ?! > Generic names don't come with exclusive ownership... > > And as has already been pointed out, offering the user a meaningless > choice between 'System Settings' and 'System Preferences' is no less > of a failure than having 2 identical items. Matthias, please, I suppose this thread doesn't need your aggressiveness. What about, instead, Shaun's proposal? It seems reasonable to me (while I like to test it) and we could do the same in GNOME stuff (while it's additional work for maintainers and tranlators).
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Hello, Why not use Gnome System Settings and KDE System Settings instead? So this can be visible in both environments, and the user will know what he needs to change. Internally I believe both can keep System Settings. Using Gnome/KDE System Settings the user will know which one he want's to use. Regards, Arx Cruz On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 9:50 PM, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > > This is what happens when you mix and match bits and pieces from > > different operating systems. There is really not much that can be done > > about it. Since that is what both KDE and GNOME are trying to do: > > build complete, self-contained systems. > So far we are running the same OS (for most of us it is Linux, but it > can be Solaris or *BSD). DE != OS. And the system can be multiuser - > which sometimes means both KDE and GNOME can be present in the same > installation. Also, some, especially semi-professional apps are not > going to be duplicated in both environments (I am not talking about > text editors or calculators) - so there are relatively high chances > that the user would need both sets of settings, for KDE and GNOME (in > that sense having ShowOnlyIn can be a bad idea - some "foreign" apps > would become not configurable). > > The best idea really would be to define the mechanism of feeding the > settings into "foreign" apps. Both directions, GNOME (desktop) ->KDE > (apps) and KDE (desktop) -> GNOME (apps). If we have that, in addition > to ShowOnlyIn, user could never notice that the system has two > variants of "System Settings". The only problem with that approach is > that some settings can be defined only in one DE. In that case, sane > default values could be the only choice.. > > Sergey > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-l...@gnome.org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list >
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 09:17:17AM +1200, Ben Cooksley wrote: > > > > Now lets go into something more productive and perhaps we can fix this > > before the sunny Desktop Summit. > > Hi Olav, > > In terms of being productive surrounding this, I have several questions: > > Screenshots on your live wiki indicate that GNOME developers were > aware of the use of the "System Settings" name by KDE. Why did your > developers deliberately proceed with the use of this name, knowing it > would cause a conflict? (This was the primary reason why I was > particularly angry about the discovery of your use of this name) I don't own any developers, nor am I a GNOME developer (see end of the email for list of the things I do for GNOME). This said, I think it was already mentioned that 'System Settings' was purposely limited to GNOME and later Unity. So care was taken to ensure KDE would not have a confusing menu entry. The rest I'd guess is either oversight, different assumptions or just lack of time. > Is there any reason why it cannot be renamed once more as soon as is > possible so that the next release your team makes fixes this issue? This has been explained already I think. Be aware that I don't have any team. > I would prefer to resolve this issue as soon as possible, to minimise > the work packagers will inevitably do to block KDE System Settings > under GNOME, and the resulting KDE application user support issues > that will arise. I think I explained that I was speaking as a moderator. I'm also in the GNOME release team, GNOME sysadmin team and a bugmaster. In none of those things I've noticed this. Regarding release team: We almost always let developers decide things and gently steer things in the right direction. See https://live.gnome.org/ReleasePlanning if you want more background on how things are done @ GNOME. Not sure how it works in KDE, but although I have my own opinion on this topic, I prefer leave this to the developers. I've noticed some of the replies you've got are a bit harsh. This is not how a discussion should be and this is why I responded + cc'ed the mailing list (to prevent it). I really care that a discussion is being held nicely (assume people mean well + somewhat concise in the amount of messages) and step in when it is not. Regarding this topic: Various GNOME developers have already replied, suggest to continue the discussion with them and I'll just lurk. -- Regards, Olav
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
> This is what happens when you mix and match bits and pieces from > different operating systems. There is really not much that can be done > about it. Since that is what both KDE and GNOME are trying to do: > build complete, self-contained systems. So far we are running the same OS (for most of us it is Linux, but it can be Solaris or *BSD). DE != OS. And the system can be multiuser - which sometimes means both KDE and GNOME can be present in the same installation. Also, some, especially semi-professional apps are not going to be duplicated in both environments (I am not talking about text editors or calculators) - so there are relatively high chances that the user would need both sets of settings, for KDE and GNOME (in that sense having ShowOnlyIn can be a bad idea - some "foreign" apps would become not configurable). The best idea really would be to define the mechanism of feeding the settings into "foreign" apps. Both directions, GNOME (desktop) ->KDE (apps) and KDE (desktop) -> GNOME (apps). If we have that, in addition to ShowOnlyIn, user could never notice that the system has two variants of "System Settings". The only problem with that approach is that some settings can be defined only in one DE. In that case, sane default values could be the only choice.. Sergey
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Luca Ferretti wrote: > What about, instead, Shaun's proposal? It seems reasonable to me > (while I like to test it) and we could do the same in GNOME stuff > (while it's additional work for maintainers and tranlators). I don't think Shauns proposal addresses the issue, really. If you want an app to be usable in different environments, then there are some good solutions: - make sure the app is self-contained and manages all of its settings itself - make your app smart enough to pick up the relevant settings from the different environments you want to support And there are bad solutions, including: - making the app drag along half of its original environment, via dependencies
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > On 22 July 2011 17:17, Ben Cooksley wrote: > To be more specific about the problem, installing kde-workspace to a > GNOME installation results in 2 indistinguishable apps named System > Settings and 2 named System Monitor. On Ubuntu at least, if I want the > GNOME version, I have to remember to click the first System Monitor > but the second System Setting which is awfully frustrating. Here's a > screenshot from my Ubuntu install: > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/75745040/Gnome%20Shell%20screnshot.png This is what happens when you mix and match bits and pieces from different operating systems. There is really not much that can be done about it. Since that is what both KDE and GNOME are trying to do: build complete, self-contained systems. Arguably, KDE is a little further along, with their big monolithic modules like kde-workspace that drag in most of the desktop, while GNOME apps can often still be installed without much of the desktop. > I'd like to suggest that the GNOME developers consider changing the > public name of their app to "System Preferences." This matches the Mac > OS X design and arguably GNOME follows some parts of OS X design. > Furthermore, it is more in line with Gnome 2's System>Preferences and > System>Administration. That is an absurd proposal. What next, rename gnome-terminal to 'Commandline Window' because Xfce also ships a 'Terminal' ?! Generic names don't come with exclusive ownership... And as has already been pointed out, offering the user a meaningless choice between 'System Settings' and 'System Preferences' is no less of a failure than having 2 identical items.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Hi, I find what is proposed by Shaun to be acceptable, as the distinction between the two is clearly defined. It still allows users to determine the correct System Settings application to use to configure KDE applications with what is probably the most minimal level of confusion. KDE System Settings will continue to be called System Settings under KDE, but will be called "KDE System Settings" under all other environments. Unfortunately, this is too late for KDE 4.7. Had I been contacted when the decision to use the name System Settings under GNOME, this entire issue could have been avoided - which I think everyone would have preferred. If any GNOME components exist which do similar using of global names, particularly in the space of preferences, it would be much appreciated if you take similar steps. @Matthias: please explain how this doesn't solve the issue. If anyone has any other comments to make on this, please do. I'll make the needed adjustments once KDE 4.7 has been released, unless objections are raised. Regards, Ben Cooksley KDE System Settings Maintainer.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Denis Washington a écrit: > Am 23.07.2011 11:54, schrieb Giovanni Campagna: >> Il giorno sab, 23/07/2011 alle 11.27 +0200, Dodji Seketeli ha scritto: >>> Matthias Clasen a écrit: >>> I don't think Shauns proposal addresses the issue, really. >>> >>> Why? Do you have an example that would show where Shaun's proposal >>> falls short? >> >> You have two .desktop files, matching the same application, so it is >> possible gnome-shell, unity or kde could pick the wrong one when >> matching desktop files to windows (unless you tweak Exec to pass >> --class, but that fails again with single-instance applications) > > But one of them is hidden via [Not]OnlyShowIn. There should be code in > all desktop's .destkop file matchers to prefer the files tailored to > the respective environment, and if not, it is easy enough to add. Exactly. > I think everyone here agrees that this more a less a temporary measure > and that other long-term solutions such as better cross-desktop > settings integration is in order. I couldn't agree more. Giovanni Campagna a écrit: [please don't CC me in your replies. I am subscribed to at lease one of the lists in the To: field] >> > If you want an app to be usable in different environments, then there >> > are some good solutions: >> > - make sure the app is self-contained and manages all of its settings >> > itself >> > - make your app smart enough to pick up the relevant settings from the >> > different environments you want to support >> > >> > And there are bad solutions, including: >> > - making the app drag along half of its original environment, via >> > dependencies >> >> You don't say why these would better address the issue "here and now" in >> comparison with what Shaun is proposing. > > You get to configure your apps once for both Gtk and Qt apps, which is > better for the user and makes the system more consistent > In particular, I underline "Gtk and Qt": you don't write GNOME apps, and > you don't write KDE apps, you write Gtk and Qt (or Qt+kdelibs) apps, and > then the toolkits adapts themselves to the environment. If you can write > a Qt+kdelibs app that work on windows or mac os x, you can make it work > out of the box in GNOME, without dragging in the entire workspace. You forgot the "here and now" part in my question. You just can't do what Mathias is proposing /quickly/ enough. It would seem to me that we need a stop gap measure now, while we carefully think about something more streamlined and future proof to be crafted later. -- Dodji
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 2011-07-23 at 11:27, Dodji Seketeli wrote: > Matthias Clasen a écrit: > > > I don't think Shauns proposal addresses the issue, really. > > Why? Do you have an example that would show where Shaun's proposal > falls short? it falls short in showing: System Settings KDE System Settings under Gnome, and: System Settings Gnome System Settings under KDE. now, if you got a computer without having it installed yourself, and you read the applications list, do you know what "KDE" or "Gnome" are? this is a non-solution, and an abdication of responsibility. the real solution is to make it unnecessary (or even conflicting) to install the KDE system settings shell under a Gnome environment, and the Gnome system settings under a KDE environment; these are configuring the system settings, and you can hardly have two systems running at the same time on the same machine. applications should not be configured through the *system* settings; and both system settings shell should configure the same services. > > If you want an app to be usable in different environments, then there > > are some good solutions: > > - make sure the app is self-contained and manages all of its settings itself > > - make your app smart enough to pick up the relevant settings from the > > different environments you want to support > > > > And there are bad solutions, including: > > - making the app drag along half of its original environment, via > > dependencies > > You don't say why these would better address the issue "here and now" in > comparison with what Shaun is proposing. there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Emmanuele Bassi a écrit: > On 2011-07-23 at 11:27, Dodji Seketeli wrote: >> Why? Do you have an example that would show where Shaun's proposal >> falls short? > > it falls short in showing: > > System Settings > KDE System Settings > > under Gnome, and: > > System Settings > Gnome System Settings > > under KDE. Oh, I see. > the real solution is to make it unnecessary (or even conflicting) to > install the KDE system settings shell under a Gnome environment, and the > Gnome system settings under a KDE environment; That would be a more elegant situation, IMO. > these are configuring the system settings, and you can hardly have two > systems running at the same time on the same machine. Agreed. > applications should not be configured through the *system* settings; > and both system settings shell should configure the same services. This makes sense to me. >> You don't say why these would better address the issue "here and now" in >> comparison with what Shaun is proposing. > > there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we > have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. My point was to have the options written down and have interested people explicitly say why a particular point is valid or not, rather than just bluntly dismissing someone's point as being a non-solution without providing rationale. As for the "here and now", I don't personally perceive this issue as urgent as I use GNOME only. But I could imagine that some people do. -- Dodji
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Dodji Seketeli wrote: > Emmanuele Bassi a écrit: > >> On 2011-07-23 at 11:27, Dodji Seketeli wrote: >>> Why? Do you have an example that would show where Shaun's proposal >>> falls short? >> >> it falls short in showing: >> >> System Settings >> KDE System Settings >> >> under Gnome, and: >> >> System Settings >> Gnome System Settings >> >> under KDE. > > Oh, I see. > >> the real solution is to make it unnecessary (or even conflicting) to >> install the KDE system settings shell under a Gnome environment, and the >> Gnome system settings under a KDE environment; > > That would be a more elegant situation, IMO. > > >> these are configuring the system settings, and you can hardly have two >> systems running at the same time on the same machine. > > Agreed. > >> applications should not be configured through the *system* settings; >> and both system settings shell should configure the same services. > > This makes sense to me. > >>> You don't say why these would better address the issue "here and now" in >>> comparison with what Shaun is proposing. >> >> there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we >> have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. > > My point was to have the options written down and have interested people > explicitly say why a particular point is valid or not, rather than just > bluntly dismissing someone's point as being a non-solution without > providing rationale. > > As for the "here and now", I don't personally perceive this issue as > urgent as I use GNOME only. But I could imagine that some people do. Just a small suggestion on how i think this should be "fixed" (since 2 desktop files for one app seems just ugly to me). Perhaps it's better to extend the desktop file specification: http://standards.freedesktop.org/desktop-entry-spec/latest/ar01s05.html And i would propose adding 2 entries: NativeDE - This one holds the desktop environment name where the app would be "native". So GNOME, KDE or whatever. NameNonNative - This one holds the app name when it's shown in a desktop environment that is not native. When not set fallback to "Name" So for example the "System Settings" app in KDE looks somewhat like this in a .desktop file: Name=System Settings NativeDE=KDE NameNonNative=KDE System Settings The same applies for gnome system settings and also for the system monitor (that also has the naming issue) Isn't this a good solution? Regards, Mark
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 4:41 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote: > @Matthias: please explain how this doesn't solve the issue. It certainly solves the immediate symptom of 'two things in the menu are named the same'.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Saturday, July 23, 2011 04:41:05 AM Ben Cooksley wrote: > Hi, > > I find what is proposed by Shaun to be acceptable, as the distinction > between the two is clearly defined. It still allows users to determine > the correct System Settings application to use to configure KDE > applications with what is probably the most minimal level of > confusion. > > KDE System Settings will continue to be called System Settings under > KDE, but will be called "KDE System Settings" under all other > environments. > > Unfortunately, this is too late for KDE 4.7. Had I been contacted when > the decision to use the name System Settings under GNOME, this entire > issue could have been avoided - which I think everyone would have > preferred. > > If any GNOME components exist which do similar using of global names, > particularly in the space of preferences, it would be much appreciated > if you take similar steps. > > @Matthias: please explain how this doesn't solve the issue. > > If anyone has any other comments to make on this, please do. I'll make > the needed adjustments once KDE 4.7 has been released, unless > objections are raised. This will, clearly, run afoul of the KDE rebranding strategy where KDE is a community and not a piece (or collection) of software. Personally I think that says more about the rebranding strategy than this proposal, but this aspect of it should be considered. Scott K
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Le 23/07/2011 12:33, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit : > On 2011-07-23 at 11:27, Dodji Seketeli wrote: >> Matthias Clasen a écrit: >> >>> I don't think Shauns proposal addresses the issue, really. >> >> Why? Do you have an example that would show where Shaun's proposal >> falls short? > > it falls short in showing: > > System Settings > KDE System Settings > > under Gnome, and: > > System Settings > Gnome System Settings > > under KDE. > > now, if you got a computer without having it installed yourself, and you > read the applications list, do you know what "KDE" or "Gnome" are? Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System Settings would not be installed. You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to what KDE and Gnome are. > applications should not be configured through the *system* settings; and > both system settings shell should configure the same services. Agreed. > >>> If you want an app to be usable in different environments, then there >>> are some good solutions: >>> - make sure the app is self-contained and manages all of its settings itself >>> - make your app smart enough to pick up the relevant settings from the >>> different environments you want to support >>> >>> And there are bad solutions, including: >>> - making the app drag along half of its original environment, via >>> dependencies Agreed as well, but very few applications actually depends on KDE system settings. At least on my Ubuntu box, only knemo and kinfocenter do (if apt-cache rdepends is to be trusted) and they are system-related utilities. >> >> You don't say why these would better address the issue "here and now" in >> comparison with what Shaun is proposing. > > there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we > have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. Releases are conflicting right *now*, so yes, I think there is a need to solve it quickly, even if the first fix is a short-term one. Aurélien
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
> Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed > computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System > Settings would not be installed. > >You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your >computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this >situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to >what KDE and Gnome are. In my experience when a user has two or more DE's installed, it is because they had one installed to begin with, then they installed a package which pulled in an entirly different DE. For me, this is the most frequent cause of multiple DE's. And it is not that rare, especially for new Linux users that don't know that there are packages sitting in the same repo's designed for one DE but not the rest.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
hi; 2011/7/24 Aurélien Gâteau : > Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed > computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System > Settings would not be installed. > > You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your > computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this > situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to > what KDE and Gnome are. installing both Gnome and KDE is not equivalent to running both at the same time. if you managed to get yourself into the scenario where KDE and Gnome have been installed at the same time then the KDE system settings shell should be marked as NotShowIn=Gnome, and the Gnome one should be NotShowIn=KDE. currently, gnome-control-center uses: OnlyShowIn=GNOME;Unity; so a menu rendered under KDE won't show it. now, googling a bit I found this: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102038/ which is, I guess, what really prompted this thread. so, if the KDE system settings shell appears alongside any other system settings shell it means that the users are not running KDE, but are running any other XDG-recognised desktop. >> there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we >> have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. > > Releases are conflicting right *now*, so yes, I think there is a need to > solve it quickly, even if the first fix is a short-term one. the short-term fix is to make the KDE system settings OnlyShowIn=KDE, so that users running KDE will not have any issue, and every other desktop will correctly not show the KDE system settings shell. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
2011/7/24 Emmanuele Bassi : > hi; > > 2011/7/24 Aurélien Gâteau : >> Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed >> computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System >> Settings would not be installed. >> >> You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your >> computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this >> situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to >> what KDE and Gnome are. > > installing both Gnome and KDE is not equivalent to running both at the > same time. > > if you managed to get yourself into the scenario where KDE and Gnome > have been installed at the same time then the KDE system settings > shell should be marked as NotShowIn=Gnome, and the Gnome one should be > NotShowIn=KDE. currently, gnome-control-center uses: > > OnlyShowIn=GNOME;Unity; > > so a menu rendered under KDE won't show it. now, googling a bit I found this: > > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102038/ > > which is, I guess, what really prompted this thread. so, if the KDE > system settings shell appears alongside any other system settings > shell it means that the users are not running KDE, but are running any > other XDG-recognised desktop. > >>> there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we >>> have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. >> >> Releases are conflicting right *now*, so yes, I think there is a need to >> solve it quickly, even if the first fix is a short-term one. > > the short-term fix is to make the KDE system settings OnlyShowIn=KDE, > so that users running KDE will not have any issue, and every other > desktop will correctly not show the KDE system settings shell. Wrong. Emmanuele, read my initial email to see why that is not an acceptable solution under any circumstances. It has to be shown in some form, regardless of the name, under all desktop environments. > > ciao, > Emmanuele. Regards, Ben > > -- > W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name > B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/ >
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sunday 24 July 2011, Ben Cooksley wrote: > 2011/7/24 Emmanuele Bassi : > > hi; > > > > 2011/7/24 Aurélien Gâteau : > >> Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed > >> computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System > >> Settings would not be installed. > >> > >> You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your > >> computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this > >> situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to > >> what KDE and Gnome are. > > > > installing both Gnome and KDE is not equivalent to running both at the > > same time. > > > > if you managed to get yourself into the scenario where KDE and Gnome > > have been installed at the same time then the KDE system settings > > shell should be marked as NotShowIn=Gnome, and the Gnome one should be > > NotShowIn=KDE. currently, gnome-control-center uses: > > > > OnlyShowIn=GNOME;Unity; > > > > so a menu rendered under KDE won't show it. now, googling a bit I found > > this: > > > > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102038/ > > > > which is, I guess, what really prompted this thread. so, if the KDE > > system settings shell appears alongside any other system settings > > shell it means that the users are not running KDE, but are running any > > other XDG-recognised desktop. > > > >>> there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we > >>> have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. > >> > >> Releases are conflicting right *now*, so yes, I think there is a need to > >> solve it quickly, even if the first fix is a short-term one. > > > > the short-term fix is to make the KDE system settings OnlyShowIn=KDE, > > so that users running KDE will not have any issue, and every other > > desktop will correctly not show the KDE system settings shell. > > Wrong. Emmanuele, read my initial email to see why that is not an > acceptable solution under any circumstances. > It has to be shown in some form, regardless of the name, under all > desktop environments. Yes, Ben is absolutely right here. It is used for setting up a whole lot of stuff like widget style, colors, printing, file associations etc. for application which link against KDE libraries, but can be run perfectly fine not only in Plasma, but also in other window managers/desktop environments. Alex
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Il giorno dom, 24/07/2011 alle 21.00 +1200, Ben Cooksley ha scritto: > 2011/7/24 Emmanuele Bassi : > > hi; > > > > 2011/7/24 Aurélien Gâteau : > >> Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed > >> computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System > >> Settings would not be installed. > >> > >> You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your > >> computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this > >> situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to > >> what KDE and Gnome are. > > > > installing both Gnome and KDE is not equivalent to running both at the > > same time. > > > > if you managed to get yourself into the scenario where KDE and Gnome > > have been installed at the same time then the KDE system settings > > shell should be marked as NotShowIn=Gnome, and the Gnome one should be > > NotShowIn=KDE. currently, gnome-control-center uses: > > > > OnlyShowIn=GNOME;Unity; > > > > so a menu rendered under KDE won't show it. now, googling a bit I found > > this: > > > > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102038/ > > > > which is, I guess, what really prompted this thread. so, if the KDE > > system settings shell appears alongside any other system settings > > shell it means that the users are not running KDE, but are running any > > other XDG-recognised desktop. > > > >>> there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we > >>> have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. > >> > >> Releases are conflicting right *now*, so yes, I think there is a need to > >> solve it quickly, even if the first fix is a short-term one. > > > > the short-term fix is to make the KDE system settings OnlyShowIn=KDE, > > so that users running KDE will not have any issue, and every other > > desktop will correctly not show the KDE system settings shell. > > Wrong. Emmanuele, read my initial email to see why that is not an > acceptable solution under any circumstances. > It has to be shown in some form, regardless of the name, under all > desktop environments. Again, no. There is nothing you want to configure, running under GNOME, in KDE system settings. Qt apps, running under GNOME, should use Gtk+ style (already done by Qt), GNOME preferred apps and mime-type associations (already done by shared-mime-info), GNOME networking preferences (already done by NetworkManager and libproxy), GNOME fonts (already done by fontconfig). Everything else (desktop effects, hardware settings, date and time, users...) should not be configurable by KDE system settings, and will likely conflict if changed. Giovanni signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Giovanni Campagna wrote: > Il giorno dom, 24/07/2011 alle 21.00 +1200, Ben Cooksley ha scritto: >> 2011/7/24 Emmanuele Bassi : >> > hi; >> > >> > 2011/7/24 Aurélien Gâteau : >> >> Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed >> >> computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System >> >> Settings would not be installed. >> >> >> >> You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your >> >> computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this >> >> situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to >> >> what KDE and Gnome are. >> > >> > installing both Gnome and KDE is not equivalent to running both at the >> > same time. >> > >> > if you managed to get yourself into the scenario where KDE and Gnome >> > have been installed at the same time then the KDE system settings >> > shell should be marked as NotShowIn=Gnome, and the Gnome one should be >> > NotShowIn=KDE. currently, gnome-control-center uses: >> > >> > OnlyShowIn=GNOME;Unity; >> > >> > so a menu rendered under KDE won't show it. now, googling a bit I found >> > this: >> > >> > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102038/ >> > >> > which is, I guess, what really prompted this thread. so, if the KDE >> > system settings shell appears alongside any other system settings >> > shell it means that the users are not running KDE, but are running any >> > other XDG-recognised desktop. >> > >> >>> there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we >> >>> have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. >> >> >> >> Releases are conflicting right *now*, so yes, I think there is a need to >> >> solve it quickly, even if the first fix is a short-term one. >> > >> > the short-term fix is to make the KDE system settings OnlyShowIn=KDE, >> > so that users running KDE will not have any issue, and every other >> > desktop will correctly not show the KDE system settings shell. >> >> Wrong. Emmanuele, read my initial email to see why that is not an >> acceptable solution under any circumstances. >> It has to be shown in some form, regardless of the name, under all >> desktop environments. > > Again, no. There is nothing you want to configure, running under GNOME, > in KDE system settings. Qt apps, running under GNOME, should use Gtk+ > style (already done by Qt), GNOME preferred apps and mime-type > associations (already done by shared-mime-info), GNOME networking > preferences (already done by NetworkManager and libproxy), GNOME fonts > (already done by fontconfig). Everything else (desktop effects, hardware > settings, date and time, users...) should not be configurable by KDE > system settings, and will likely conflict if changed. Wrong, wrong and wrong. Phonon backend cannot be configured without System Settings. Standard keyboard shortcuts for KDE applications cannot be configured without System Settings. We don't share Date/Time/Localisation/etc - you need System Settings for that. Theme - we both have our own stores of it - you need System Settings again (in case you don't believe me, read ~/.gtk2rc) KDE Wallet has some of it's configuration stored in System Settings too - and it is used by KDE applications even outside KDE for secure password storage. Regards, Ben Cooksley
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Il giorno dom, 24/07/2011 alle 22.37 +1200, Ben Cooksley ha scritto: > On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 10:25 PM, Giovanni Campagna > wrote: > > Il giorno dom, 24/07/2011 alle 21.00 +1200, Ben Cooksley ha scritto: > >> 2011/7/24 Emmanuele Bassi : > >> > hi; > >> > > >> > 2011/7/24 Aurélien Gâteau : > >> >> Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed > >> >> computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System > >> >> Settings would not be installed. > >> >> > >> >> You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your > >> >> computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this > >> >> situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to > >> >> what KDE and Gnome are. > >> > > >> > installing both Gnome and KDE is not equivalent to running both at the > >> > same time. > >> > > >> > if you managed to get yourself into the scenario where KDE and Gnome > >> > have been installed at the same time then the KDE system settings > >> > shell should be marked as NotShowIn=Gnome, and the Gnome one should be > >> > NotShowIn=KDE. currently, gnome-control-center uses: > >> > > >> > OnlyShowIn=GNOME;Unity; > >> > > >> > so a menu rendered under KDE won't show it. now, googling a bit I found > >> > this: > >> > > >> > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/102038/ > >> > > >> > which is, I guess, what really prompted this thread. so, if the KDE > >> > system settings shell appears alongside any other system settings > >> > shell it means that the users are not running KDE, but are running any > >> > other XDG-recognised desktop. > >> > > >> >>> there is no "here and now" — that would be a hack. I hardly think we > >> >>> have to solve this *quickly*, so we should solve it correctly. > >> >> > >> >> Releases are conflicting right *now*, so yes, I think there is a need to > >> >> solve it quickly, even if the first fix is a short-term one. > >> > > >> > the short-term fix is to make the KDE system settings OnlyShowIn=KDE, > >> > so that users running KDE will not have any issue, and every other > >> > desktop will correctly not show the KDE system settings shell. > >> > >> Wrong. Emmanuele, read my initial email to see why that is not an > >> acceptable solution under any circumstances. > >> It has to be shown in some form, regardless of the name, under all > >> desktop environments. > > > > Again, no. There is nothing you want to configure, running under GNOME, > > in KDE system settings. Qt apps, running under GNOME, should use Gtk+ > > style (already done by Qt), GNOME preferred apps and mime-type > > associations (already done by shared-mime-info), GNOME networking > > preferences (already done by NetworkManager and libproxy), GNOME fonts > > (already done by fontconfig). Everything else (desktop effects, hardware > > settings, date and time, users...) should not be configurable by KDE > > system settings, and will likely conflict if changed. > > Wrong, wrong and wrong. > Phonon backend cannot be configured without System Settings. And that's a feature, I suppose. As a GNOME user, I want GStreamer at all times (and as a Fedora user, I can't even install xine). > Standard keyboard shortcuts for KDE applications cannot be configured > without System Settings. Which is a KDE bug. You should use GNOME shortcuts when possible. I mean, Gtk has emacs and Mac OS modes for keybindings, I doubt Qt hasn't something similar. > We don't share Date/Time/Localisation/etc - you need System Settings for that. You don't have $LANG? or org.freedesktop.Accounts? Both are KDE bugs. > Theme - we both have our own stores of it - you need System Settings > again (in case you don't believe me, read ~/.gtk2rc) It is true that you can change KDE theme without changing the GTK one, but why would one want that? I want the look and feel of my system to be consistent, even when different apps or toolkits are used, and I want one place to configure the theme. (or none, if I'm using GNOME3 ) > KDE Wallet has some of it's configuration stored in System Settings > too - and it is used by KDE applications even outside KDE for secure > password storage. KDE apps under GNOME should use gnome-keyring, not kwallet: that's what org.freedesktop.Secrets is for. Giovanni signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sunday 24 July 2011 17:55:54 Giovanni Campagna wrote: > Il giorno dom, 24/07/2011 alle 22.37 +1200, Ben Cooksley ha scritto: > > Wrong, wrong and wrong. > > Phonon backend cannot be configured without System Settings. > And that's a feature, I suppose. As a GNOME user, I want GStreamer at > all times (and as a Fedora user, I can't even install xine). The Xine backend is not maintained anymore, so the choice is between the libvlc backend and gstreamer backend for most users, and many users actually prefer the libvlc backend (for many reasons, none of which are relevant here :-). I am not familiar with what additional restrictions your distro puts on you wrt. multimedia applications, so this might not be relevant to you, though. My two cent is that Gnome should rename it's configuration application to something that reflects what it is, instead of stealing the name from the KDE system configuration application. -- Martin Sandsmark
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Le 24/07/2011 10:25, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit : > hi; > > 2011/7/24 Aurélien Gâteau : >> Most distributions split KDE packages so if you get a pre-installed >> computer with Gnome and a few KDE applications installed, KDE System >> Settings would not be installed. >> >> You are only likely to get both System Settings pre-installed if your >> computer was shipped with both KDE and Gnome desktops. In this >> situation, I assume you would be provided with some explanation as to >> what KDE and Gnome are. > > installing both Gnome and KDE is not equivalent to running both at the > same time. Indeed, but still, if there is a use for KDE System Settings to appear on the Gnome desktop, then Shaun solution is appropriate IMO, but that actually brings another interesting question: Which KCM (KDE Control Module, the elements shown in KDE System Settings) are actually useful when running on Gnome? As I said, to the best of my knowledge, very few applications must be configured from a KCM. The only two applications I found on Ubuntu are KInfoCenter and KNemo, which are both KDE workspace-specific. A regular (meaning with a main window) application should show its configuration through its "Settings" menu. A window-less application is most likely workspace-specific and would probably not be useful on a different workspace. Do we have examples of KDE window-less applications which are useful on Gnome? Another use for KDE System Settings on Gnome is the configuration of the palette, font and icon settings of KDE applications. Interestingly I pushed yesterday a commit which makes KDE applications follow the workspace settings for palette and font (I have yet to do icons) when not running on a KDE workspace, just like Qt-only applications do (BTW, would be awesome if you Gnome devs could do the same for Gnome applications running on a KDE workspace). So this is not relevant anymore. If there is no need for KDE System Settings on a Gnome desktop, then adding a OnlyShowIn=KDE; key to the desktop file would be appropriate. If on the other hand there is a need for KDE System Settings on a Gnome desktop, then Shaun solution is correct IMO and we should start to think about adding support for OnlyShowIn to KCM desktop files, because it makes no sense for example to be able to define Plasma Desktop wallpaper when running on Gnome. Aurélien
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Le 24/07/2011 12:55, Giovanni Campagna a écrit : > Which is a KDE bug. You should use GNOME shortcuts when possible. I > mean, Gtk has emacs and Mac OS modes for keybindings, I doubt Qt hasn't > something similar. > It is true that you can change KDE theme without changing the GTK one, > but why would one want that? I want the look and feel of my system to be > consistent, even when different apps or toolkits are used, and I want > one place to configure the theme. > (or none, if I'm using GNOME3 ) > KDE apps under GNOME should use gnome-keyring, not kwallet: that's what > org.freedesktop.Secrets is for. What about the other way around BTW? Do GNOME applications running on a KDE workspace follow KDE keybindings, theme, palette, fonts and icon theme? Do they use kwallet instead of gnome-keyring? If they don't I guess there is also a use for running GNOME System Settings on a KDE workspace. Aurélien
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 01:38:34PM +0200, Martin Sandsmark wrote: > My two cent is that Gnome should rename it's configuration application to > something that reflects what it is, instead of stealing the name from the KDE > system configuration application. I've already mentioned in the first reply that I'd appreciate a polite discussion. I think that was enough warning. -- Regards, Olav (moderator)
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sunday 24 July 2011 20:27:58 Martin Gräßlin wrote: > On Sunday 24 July 2011 14:12:21 Aurélien Gâteau wrote: > > If there is no need for KDE System Settings on a Gnome desktop, then > > adding a OnlyShowIn=KDE; key to the desktop file would be appropriate. > > If on the other hand there is a need for KDE System Settings on a Gnome > > desktop, then Shaun solution is correct IMO and we should start to think > > about adding support for OnlyShowIn to KCM desktop files, because it > > makes no sense for example to be able to define Plasma Desktop wallpaper > > when running on Gnome. > > Technically seen systemsettings lives in kde-workspace which means it is > only relevant to the KDE Plasma Workspaces. Non Workspace applications > should not depend on its availability and if they require it, I would > consider this as an application bug. E.g. the mentioned kinfocenter is a > Workspace app. > > Kcmshell on the other hand, which is required to run a single KCM, lives in > kde-runtime and all KDE applications can rely on it being around. So an > application having an external KCM can even be configured if systemsettings > is not around. E.g. fonts can be configured using kcmshell4 fonts > even without systemsettings. > > Given that, I agree with Aurélien that the most appropriate solution is to > not show our KDE Plasma systemsettings in a non Plasma environment (with > the exception of Microsoft Windows). > > I find this whole discussion rather depressing, especially the fact that it > ended up on Slashdot&Co. Let's try to take something out of it and try in > future to discuss such points each other before possible harm is done. This > of course applies to both KDE and GNOME developers :-) I btw. agree that a kde application outside of a kde workspace should be self contained. We could solve that problem btw inside of the kde framework even. As Martin masterfully proved systemsettings is a workspace application and should not be be required outside of a full kde workspace (if someone decides to install it intentionally it should still work so the original problem has to be solved anyway.) A application could recognize that it is run outside of an active kde workspace and add all needed kcms (which should be as less as possible ) to its settings menu in that case. But we should really try to respect of the active workspaces settings as possible therefore making as muss kcms as possible useless in such an environment. Mike > > Cheers > Martin Gräßlin > > KWin Maintainer
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
hi; On 24 July 2011 10:00, Ben Cooksley wrote: >> the short-term fix is to make the KDE system settings OnlyShowIn=KDE, >> so that users running KDE will not have any issue, and every other >> desktop will correctly not show the KDE system settings shell. > > Wrong. Emmanuele, read my initial email to see why that is not an > acceptable solution under any circumstances. > It has to be shown in some form, regardless of the name, under all > desktop environments. this is utterly ridiculous. you're saying that anyone using a KDE application should also install the KDE system settings shell because it is the only way to configure KDE *applications*? Qt, like GTK+ uses the same XSETTINGS protocol, to allow interoperability between toolkits on the same environment -- that's what we use to bridge stuff like the icon theme, the application font name, and other settings shared across desktops. this is no more a simple matter of user-facing names: your position is that only the KDE system settings can change those settings; this is factually wrong, and ignores what's been done in the past 10 years to allow interoperability between toolkits and environments. if we want to add new shared XSETTINGS key we can definitely talk about that; forcing the hand of users and saying that you require KDE system settings, and the half of KDE they string along, to configure a KDE application is not an acceptable solution in any scenario -- unless you start making every single KDE application strictly depend on the KDE system settings package. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
hi; 2011/7/24 Aurélien Gâteau : > What about the other way around BTW? Do GNOME applications running on a > KDE workspace follow KDE keybindings, theme, palette, fonts and icon > theme? GTK+ applications use the XSETTINGS keys: http://standards.freedesktop.org/xsettings-spec/xsettings-spec-0.5.html so every key that is shared using that specification is picked up automatically by GTK+ applications. we can definitely talk about extending the set of shared keys: we routinely do that on xdg-list -- for instance when the sound theme spec was introduced. > Do they use kwallet instead of gnome-keyring? applications using the org.freedesktop.Secrets API will ask for the well-known bus name, and get to talk to the daemon implementing it; that means using the gnome-keyring daemon or kwallet, depending on which is installed. the same mechanism of auto-activation is used for many other things. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi/
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Le 24 juil. 2011 14:35, "Aurélien Gâteau" a écrit : > Le 24/07/2011 12:55, Giovanni Campagna a écrit : >> Which is a KDE bug. You should use GNOME shortcuts when possible. I >> mean, Gtk has emacs and Mac OS modes for keybindings, I doubt Qt hasn't >> something similar. > > >> It is true that you can change KDE theme without changing the GTK one, >> but why would one want that? I want the look and feel of my system to be >> consistent, even when different apps or toolkits are used, and I want >> one place to configure the theme. >> (or none, if I'm using GNOME3 ) > > >> KDE apps under GNOME should use gnome-keyring, not kwallet: that's what >> org.freedesktop.Secrets is for. > > > What about the other way around BTW? Do GNOME applications running on a > KDE workspace follow KDE keybindings, theme, palette, fonts and icon > theme? Do they use kwallet instead of gnome-keyring? If they don't I > guess there is also a use for running GNOME System Settings on a KDE > workspace. Well, I wrote xsettings-kde http://svn.mandriva.com/viewvc/soft/theme/xsettings-kde/ in 2007 which exports kde settings as xsettings and causes GNOME/GTK applications to follow KDE settings. Unfortunately, this code has never been integrated in KDE... -- Frédéric Crozat
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sunday 24 July 2011, Olav Vitters wrote: > On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 01:38:34PM +0200, Martin Sandsmark wrote: > > My two cent is that Gnome should rename it's configuration > > application to something that reflects what it is, instead of > > stealing the name from the KDE system configuration application. > > I've already mentioned in the first reply that I'd appreciate a > polite discussion. I think that was enough warning. As moderator of kde-core-devel I fully agree. Please keep the discussion constructive. As user I wish that you get together during the Desktop Summit and come up with a solution/plan for joined system settings which can be edited on each desktop with the corresponding system settings app. Regards, Ingo signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Le 24/07/2011 17:11, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit : > GTK+ applications use the XSETTINGS keys: > > http://standards.freedesktop.org/xsettings-spec/xsettings-spec-0.5.html > > so every key that is shared using that specification is picked up > automatically by GTK+ applications. > > we can definitely talk about extending the set of shared keys: we > routinely do that on xdg-list -- for instance when the sound theme > spec was introduced. The spec does not provide a list of shared keys, does such a list exist? If there is no such list I don't see how we could share anything. I don't know what is shared right now but it is definitely not enough: a GTK application running on a KDE workspace does not follow KDE keybindings, palette, fonts, icon theme, label alignment or dialog button order. Additionally I don't believe a shared keys system is enough to share a widget theme. Otherwise the Oxygen devs probably wouldn't have created the Oxygen GTK theme. >> Do they use kwallet instead of gnome-keyring? > > applications using the org.freedesktop.Secrets API will ask for the > well-known bus name, and get to talk to the daemon implementing it; > that means using the gnome-keyring daemon or kwallet, depending on > which is installed. the same mechanism of auto-activation is used for > many other things. Unfortunately kwallet does not implement org.freedesktop.Secrets yet as far as I understand it. I was also under the impression that the spec was not ready, since its version number is "0.1 DRAFT". Aurélien
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, they're insular and only care for themselves. In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be trusted. Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due to the number of applicable panels and apps. As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself "System Settings" under KDE, but would prefix "KDE" to the name under all other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. I have recieved objections that this collides with the "branding policy" however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who object propose? A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get blamed for it. Regards, Ben Cooksley System Settings Maintainer
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sunday 24 July 2011 Ben Cooksley wrote: > Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't > interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, > they're insular and only care for themselves. I don't want to let a statement like this stand as it is. There are a lot of people in the GNOME community who do want to cooperate. There certainly are also people who don't. That's the same in our community. Not everybody cares about cross-desktop collaboration, and this creates issues, as we have seen. Still, we should treat each other with respect. I understand that it makes you angry, if things break because of decisions outside your control, which you consider to be wrong. But being angry doesn't solve problems, especially not when communication about a common solution is required. There are a lot of technical things we can do to address this specific problem, taking settings from the platform, making configuration available in context, making KDE applications and frameworks more modular and less interdependent. Not everything can be done easily, but we should look for the right solutions and persue them. Additionally we need to talk about how to do integration across desktops. We should not be content with having insular desktops, neither on the GNOME side, nor on our side, nor anywhere else. This only limits us, how we are perceived, and what users think what they can do with KDE software. We aren't the monolithic desktop, which only runs KDE software, and which is required by all KDE applications. That's exactly the misconception we are trying to get rid of. So let's have a constructive conversation with GNOME and others how to share settings, how to integrate applications running on different workspaces independent of the toolkit they are implemented with. The desktop summit provides a great opportunity for that. But again, please act with respect for your own and other communities. Being aggressive doesn't help in finding good solutions for users, and it's really not the atmosphere, I'd like to see in KDE. -- Cornelius Schumacher
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Still, we should treat each other with respect. [...] being angry doesn't solve problems, especially not when communication about a common solution is required. [...] Not everything can be done easily, but we should look for the right solutions and persue them. There is no established mechanism to rate mailing list posts, but i'd mod this one up. (:
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
2011/7/25 Cornelius Schumacher : > On Sunday 24 July 2011 Ben Cooksley wrote: >> Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't >> interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, >> they're insular and only care for themselves. > > I don't want to let a statement like this stand as it is. There are a lot of > people in the GNOME community who do want to cooperate. There certainly are > also people who don't. That's the same in our community. Not everybody cares > about cross-desktop collaboration, and this creates issues, as we have seen. In this case, they have not surfaced it seems. Only the ones who don't want to co-operate have surfaced. > > Still, we should treat each other with respect. I understand that it makes you > angry, if things break because of decisions outside your control, which you > consider to be wrong. But being angry doesn't solve problems, especially not > when communication about a common solution is required. > > There are a lot of technical things we can do to address this specific > problem, taking settings from the platform, making configuration available in > context, making KDE applications and frameworks more modular and less > interdependent. Not everything can be done easily, but we should look for the > right solutions and persue them. They will take time to implement. And can only be done in the next release anyway - assuming people work on it. KDE 4.7 will probably be shipped by distributions alongside GNOME 3.0. A short term solution is required at the bare minimum to fix that - which can be done as I noted. Otherwise our users will be the ones who will suffer. > > Additionally we need to talk about how to do integration across desktops. We > should not be content with having insular desktops, neither on the GNOME side, > nor on our side, nor anywhere else. This only limits us, how we are perceived, > and what users think what they can do with KDE software. We aren't the > monolithic desktop, which only runs KDE software, and which is required by all > KDE applications. That's exactly the misconception we are trying to get rid > of. > > So let's have a constructive conversation with GNOME and others how to share > settings, how to integrate applications running on different workspaces > independent of the toolkit they are implemented with. The desktop summit > provides a great opportunity for that. > > But again, please act with respect for your own and other communities. Being > aggressive doesn't help in finding good solutions for users, and it's really > not the atmosphere, I'd like to see in KDE. Whilst not an atmosphere I like either, the short term solution appears to have been totally rejected on both sides. How do you suggest this is solved? > -- > Cornelius Schumacher > Regards, Ben
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
KDE 4.7 will probably be shipped by distributions alongside GNOME 3.0. A short term solution is required at the bare minimum to fix that - which can be done as I noted. Where's the problem? Have the release tarballs already and irrevocably been forged and fed into some unstoppable mechanism? On 23/07/11 00:25, Shaun McCance wrote: Name=System Settings OnlyShowIn=KDE The other looks like this: Name=KDE System Settings NotShowIn=KDE Why not just SVN_SILENTly add these tree lines in the .desktop file and include in 4.7 gold? Two more days seem to give plenty time for that. Otherwise our users will be the ones who will suffer. I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... This NamingClashCrisis is more ridiculous ego tussle then a real problem. For comparison, hunger crisis in Somalia is a real problem where people actually do suffer. #peace/marcel.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Dimanche, le 24 juillet 2011, à 23:07, Ben Cooksley a écrit: > Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't > interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, > they're insular and only care for themselves. This is quite insulting, I do not think many share your broad accusations, I least I hope not many do. Sorry, Ben, but someone who names his program with that general term "System settings" and expects it to have this name in all of the shells/workspaces (Gnome Shell, Unity, XFCE, Enlightenment, $WINDOWMANAGER, even in Windows and OS X?), while it only basically controls settings of the KDE runtime env/platform, is at least also one who is insular and only cares for himself (or his workspace), no? Think about it. At least to me System = Shell/Workspace or OS/Computer even. And with my user hat on I would think this "Linux" is utterly shitty if I have to use different setting programs for all the existing toolkits out there, to do the same settings again and again. I am only looking out to also see Tcl Settings, EFL Settings, Gnustep Settings. Perhaps also some Motif Settings, to be old-school. Perfect! Not. If Joe user uses Unity and wants to use that hex editor Okteta someone recommended to him, would/should he need to know about "KDE" and that Okteta is implemented based on another toolkit than most of the default programs? I say No, and guess most users don't care as well (unless "toolkit racists"). And thus he should also not need to know he has to use that other "System Settings" then the general system settings. > In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are > going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because > otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME > to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). Well, the two desktop file solution might work, no? Name it "KDE System Settings" or similar for non-Plasma envs in one file, and "System Settings" for Plasma envs in the original one. Make that other file a patch for 4.7.1. Or did I miss something? > A long term solution ... is to continue all the work that has been done to share as many settings as possible, and to support running programs in not-the-native environments, ideally without the need for a separate settings program for the toolkit in use, using some sane defaults there if needed. A big thanks for everyone who has done before or/and keeps pushing on this, like Aurélien with the "kdeui/kernel: Use platform palette and fonts" commit only last friday. And otherwise I completely agree with Cornelius. Cheers Friedrich -- Desktop Summit 2011 in Berlin - Registered already? - www.desktopsummit.org
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:26 PM, marcel partap wrote: >> KDE 4.7 will probably be shipped by distributions alongside GNOME 3.0. >> A short term solution is required at the bare minimum to fix that - >> which can be done as I noted. > > Where's the problem? Have the release tarballs already and irrevocably been > forged and fed into some unstoppable mechanism? Per the KDE Release Schedule, we are frozen for everything except build compilation failures, as the KDE 4.7.0 release process is underway. > >> On 23/07/11 00:25, Shaun McCance wrote: >>> >>> Name=System Settings >>> OnlyShowIn=KDE >>> >>> The other looks like this: >>> >>> Name=KDE System Settings >>> NotShowIn=KDE > > Why not just SVN_SILENTly add these tree lines in the .desktop file and > include in 4.7 gold? Two more days seem to give plenty time for that. That is a violation of the release schedule. See above. The translation freeze started a long time ago. > >> Otherwise our users will be the ones who will suffer. > > I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... This NamingClashCrisis is more They will. As an example, KMyMoney users for instance depend on System Settings to be able to set their locale, and therefore the default currency, date format, etc. > ridiculous ego tussle then a real problem. For comparison, hunger crisis in > Somalia is a real problem where people actually do suffer. > #peace/marcel. > Regards, Ben
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote: > Dimanche, le 24 juillet 2011, à 23:07, Ben Cooksley a écrit: >> Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't >> interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, >> they're insular and only care for themselves. > > This is quite insulting, I do not think many share your broad accusations, I > least I hope not many do. > > Sorry, Ben, but someone who names his program with that general term "System > settings" and expects it to have this name in all of the shells/workspaces > (Gnome Shell, Unity, XFCE, Enlightenment, $WINDOWMANAGER, even in Windows and > OS X?), while it only basically controls settings of the KDE runtime > env/platform, is at least also one who is insular and only cares for himself > (or his workspace), no? Think about it. At least to me System = > Shell/Workspace or OS/Computer even. I didn't choose the name. It was chosen a long time ago, when KDE 4.0 was originally forged. I rewrote it to add features, and became maintainer around KDE 4.2. I kept the original name to avoid changing things, and therefore creating user criticism. I have already been criticised for changing the layout of modules in System Settings. I am fairly sure that changing it's name would bring similar criticism. > > And with my user hat on I would think this "Linux" is utterly shitty if I have > to use different setting programs for all the existing toolkits out there, to > do the same settings again and again. > I am only looking out to also see Tcl Settings, EFL Settings, Gnustep > Settings. Perhaps also some Motif Settings, to be old-school. Perfect! Not. I haven't written any of the modules. I just know what is actually the case. > > If Joe user uses Unity and wants to use that hex editor Okteta someone > recommended to him, would/should he need to know about "KDE" and that Okteta > is implemented based on another toolkit than most of the default programs? > I say No, and guess most users don't care as well (unless "toolkit racists"). > And thus he should also not need to know he has to use that other "System > Settings" then the general system settings. > >> In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are >> going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because >> otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME >> to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). > > Well, the two desktop file solution might work, no? Name it "KDE System > Settings" or similar for non-Plasma envs in one file, and "System Settings" > for Plasma envs in the original one. Make that other file a patch for 4.7.1. > Or did I miss something? I already said it would. However certain people have complained that this violates the branding, as "KDE" is the community rather than the product. > >> A long term solution > > ... is to continue all the work that has been done to share as many settings > as possible, and to support running programs in not-the-native environments, > ideally without the need for a separate settings program for the toolkit in > use, using some sane defaults there if needed. > A big thanks for everyone who has done before or/and keeps pushing on this, > like Aurélien with the "kdeui/kernel: Use platform palette and fonts" commit > only last friday. Of course that is the proper solution. Assuming they comply as well, so their apps follow our settings in a KDE Workspace. > > And otherwise I completely agree with Cornelius. > > Cheers > Friedrich > -- > Desktop Summit 2011 in Berlin - Registered already? - www.desktopsummit.org >
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Monday 25 July 2011 06.02.17 Ben Cooksley wrote: > > Sorry, Ben, but someone who names his program with that general term > > "System settings" and expects it to have this name in all of the > > shells/workspaces (Gnome Shell, Unity, XFCE, Enlightenment, > > $WINDOWMANAGER, even in Windows and OS X?), while it only basically > > controls settings of the KDE runtime env/platform, is at least also one > > who is insular and only cares for himself (or his workspace), no? Think > > about it. At least to me System = > > Shell/Workspace or OS/Computer even. > > I didn't choose the name. It was chosen a long time ago, when KDE 4.0 > was originally forged. I rewrote it to add features, and became > maintainer around KDE 4.2. I kept the original name to avoid changing > things, and therefore creating user criticism. > > I have already been criticised for changing the layout of modules in > System Settings. I am fairly sure that changing it's name would bring > similar criticism. Hi Ben, I think Friedrich didn't mean to imply you were the one who choose it, or in any way that you made mistakes in the past. I share the opinion with him that when Gnome chooses a similar name for something like "System Settings" the response of assuming bad faith is probably a wrong start. To be clear; In my opinion its irrelevant if or why Gnome choose the name to be similar as KDE on purpose. The reason its irrelevant is because this shows that our system settings actually is only for KDE based applications. Probably not due to our fault, and certainly not due to you, Ben, but there we have it. Today we realized that Gnome apps don't use our settings and KDE apps need some KCMs that have no Gnome equivalents. And thats not something to get mad about when others work around it, I would personally see that as a call to action. So what happened is that a group of people who can't use our system settings, but wants their own system settings assumes something that with this new information turns out to be wrong. Call it a different focus on how their users desktop works. Which is a choice they made we can't get mad over. The long term response certainly is to get out of the situation where KDE apps can't be configured without KDEs system settings application. I'll personally take a look at my app; KWord. I have to figure out if Gnome (or Windows) users can configure their locale so we don't have a default of A4 for users that want a Letter sized page. -- Thomas Zander
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sunday, July 24, 2011 05:07:19 PM Ben Cooksley wrote: > Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't > interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, > they're insular and only care for themselves. > > In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are > going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because > otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME > to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). > > A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are > bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be > trusted. > Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due > to the number of applicable panels and apps. > > As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself "System > Settings" under KDE, but would prefix "KDE" to the name under all > other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. > > I have recieved objections that this collides with the "branding > policy" however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who > object propose? I mentioned this, but didn't actually object (not sure if you got comments from others on this). I think KDE systemsettings is fine. If you wanted to stick with the official rebrandingspeak, I think (I can't tell) it should be either Plasma Workspace Systemsettings, KDE Plasma Systemsettings, or something like System settings for KDE Frameworks. I've no idea really. > A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our > applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get > blamed for it. For Kubuntu we've taken the position that we will follow KDE upstream on this and that until there is an upstream solution the only reasonable distro level thing to do is patch Gnome systemsettings back to it's old name to avoid user confusion. Scott K
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sunday, July 24, 2011 05:52:08 PM Cornelius Schumacher wrote: > On Sunday 24 July 2011 Ben Cooksley wrote: > > Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't > > interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, > > they're insular and only care for themselves. > > I don't want to let a statement like this stand as it is. There are a lot > of people in the GNOME community who do want to cooperate. There certainly > are also people who don't. That's the same in our community. Not everybody > cares about cross-desktop collaboration, and this creates issues, as we > have seen. > > Still, we should treat each other with respect. I understand that it makes > you angry, if things break because of decisions outside your control, > which you consider to be wrong. But being angry doesn't solve problems, > especially not when communication about a common solution is required. > > There are a lot of technical things we can do to address this specific > problem, taking settings from the platform, making configuration available > in context, making KDE applications and frameworks more modular and less > interdependent. Not everything can be done easily, but we should look for > the right solutions and persue them. > > Additionally we need to talk about how to do integration across desktops. > We should not be content with having insular desktops, neither on the > GNOME side, nor on our side, nor anywhere else. This only limits us, how > we are perceived, and what users think what they can do with KDE software. > We aren't the monolithic desktop, which only runs KDE software, and which > is required by all KDE applications. That's exactly the misconception we > are trying to get rid of. > > So let's have a constructive conversation with GNOME and others how to > share settings, how to integrate applications running on different > workspaces independent of the toolkit they are implemented with. The > desktop summit provides a great opportunity for that. > > But again, please act with respect for your own and other communities. > Being aggressive doesn't help in finding good solutions for users, and > it's really not the atmosphere, I'd like to see in KDE. I haven't seen anything in any mailing list posts that is nearly as aggressive as knowningly reusing a name that was in use like systemsettings. My word for the messages that the Gnome moderators didn't like the tone of is accurate. Scott K
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Monday 25 July 2011 07.49.17 Scott Kitterman wrote: > I haven't seen anything in any mailing list posts that is nearly as > aggressive as knowningly reusing a name that was in use like > systemsettings. Please don't assume that was an agressive act. I can totally see that someone that goes with the assumption that a piece of software is only usable on one desktop won't have problems if you call a similar piece of software the same on your desktop. In general; please stop assuming ;) (ask politely first) -- Thomas Zander
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Where's the problem? Have the release tarballs already and irrevocably been forged and fed into some unstoppable mechanism? Per the KDE Release Schedule, we are frozen for everything except build compilation failures, as the KDE 4.7.0 release process is underway. So what is the better option here, violate rules to prevent any users from 'suffering' - or for no meaningful reason (besides 'discipline') strictly adhering to that self-imposed code of conduct and finding ways to cope with the implications that might have? Have you asked 4.7 release manager about it? It would come as a big surprise if anyone would be going to file an official complaint for breaching the freeze for this very valid reason. I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... They will. Will not, because the KDE team will act with common sense, of course. Experience Freedom! The KDE® Community is an international technology team dedicated to creating a free and user-friendly computing experience
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Heya folks :) This whole debate is way too heated and I'd like to take this out of the arena. Are there 2 or 3 people on the GNOME side that are available to talk this through and find a solution? Ideally whoever maintains system settings on the GNOME side would be one of them. I'd like to work with them and Ben on finding a good solution. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher KDE Community Working Group member http://kde.org - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Sunday, July 24, 2011 16:05:22 Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > you're saying that anyone using a KDE application should also install > the KDE system settings shell because it is the only way to configure > KDE *applications*? Qt, like GTK+ uses the same XSETTINGS protocol, to > allow interoperability between toolkits on the same environment -- > that's what we use to bridge stuff like the icon theme, the > application font name, and other settings shared across desktops. replying only to k-c-d as i hav eno interest in getting involved in the cat fight, but i would like to add some information to this discussion: * what Emmanuele writes above is not fully accurate. i have had to on more than one occassion run the GNOME control panels to get specific features working properly after installing GNOME applications. he describes a perfect or near-perfect world in which we do not yet exist. * Martin Gräßlin is correct that systemsettings is a workspace application; any kcm's that are required by non-workspace apps must be usable via kcmshell4 which is included in the runtime for this purpose. it is not perfect, in terms of giving users of KDE applications a perfect experience in, say a GNOME workspace, but then that's probably why we also recommend the KDE workspaces ;). but NO KDE application outside of the kde-workspace module may reasonably expect that ANY workspace app is installed. period. * if our users complain about the results, we can easily point them to the decison made by the GNOME community and let the fault lay on that decision. it is not our job to police everyone who writes free software, even if their decisions do not fit ours. we can point them to kcmshell4 and shrug our shoulders, noting that in the choice of GNOME3 as a shell, the user has made a decision with several collateral effects. * technical solutions to the underlying problems of needing multiple control panel applications installed simultaneously, not being able to extend the workspace control panels in a workspace-neutral way and not sharing technologies we probably ought to anyways for the sake of our users (the "SecretService" thing being a god example: when will we finally see that in git? :) are ways to improve the situation over the long term and the things we ought to be spending time and energy on. so regardless of what anyone may feel about the sociability / ethics of recent naming choices, the above are the useful points in terms of "being able to make things better for our users". -- Aaron J. Seigo humru othro a kohnu se GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 07/24/2011 05:11 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: applications using the org.freedesktop.Secrets API will ask for the well-known bus name, and get to talk to the daemon implementing it; that means using the gnome-keyring daemon or kwallet, depending on which is installed. the same mechanism of auto-activation is used for many other things. A bit out of topic, just let me say that this secrets/wallet/keyring thingy is really cool ;) Ciao, -- Andrea Diamantini, adjam GPG Fingerprint: 57DE 8E32 7D1A 0E16 AA52 59D8 84F9 3ECD DBF9 730F rekonq project WEB: http://rekonq.kde.org IRC: rekonq@freenode
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 07/24/2011 09:10 PM, Michael Jansen wrote: I btw. agree that a kde application outside of a kde workspace should be self contained. We could solve that problem btw inside of the kde framework even. As Martin masterfully proved systemsettings is a workspace application and should not be be required outside of a full kde workspace (if someone decides to install it intentionally it should still work so the original problem has to be solved anyway.) A application could recognize that it is run outside of an active kde workspace and add all needed kcms (which should be as less as possible ) to its settings menu in that case. But we should really try to respect of the active workspaces settings as possible therefore making as muss kcms as possible useless in such an environment. Mike Given that, it seems clear to me that all "important" and "shared" KCMs should live in kde-runtime. Isn't it? Regards, -- Andrea Diamantini, adjam GPG Fingerprint: 57DE 8E32 7D1A 0E16 AA52 59D8 84F9 3ECD DBF9 730F rekonq project WEB: http://rekonq.kde.org IRC: rekonq@freenode
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
> Which settings don't they follow? Apart from theme (as there is no gtk3 > engine written in Qt yet) Why do theme engines have to be written for Qt in order to let GTK apps at least integrate visually into a Qt environment. There should be a Qt theme loader in GTK just as there is a GTK theme loader in Qt. Well, other than that: GNOME/GTK apps don't integrate with the Notifications panel, File Type Associations, Icon theme, CDDB config (for media players or CD rippers), ...
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Am Montag 25 Juli 2011, 02:37:15 schrieb Friedrich W. H. Kossebau: > Sorry, Ben, but someone who names his program with that general term > "System settings" and expects it to have this name in all of the > shells/workspaces (Gnome Shell, Unity, XFCE, Enlightenment, > $WINDOWMANAGER, even in Windows and OS X?), while it only basically > controls settings of the KDE runtime env/platform, is at least also one > who is insular and only cares for himself (or his workspace), no? Hey, why don't we just rename Plasma Desktop as "Windows"? After all it's just a general term. Let's see how Microsoft's lawyers see that... Seriously, there was no System Settings application in any repository I know before our System Settings was developed (first for KDE3, later SC4) and the term is perfectly fine for at least some distributions which use System Settings as sole configuration central with printer config etc. (If I'm not mistaken SUSE and Mandriva(+derivatives) are the only exceptions). > Well, the two desktop file solution might work, no? Name it "KDE System > Settings" or similar for non-Plasma envs in one file, and "System Settings" > for Plasma envs in the original one. Make that other file a patch for > 4.7.1. Or did I miss something? Why should we again be the ones to move when GNOME chose to use that already taken name? That rename proposal would torpedo our branding own effort suggesting that "KDE" is the name for the environment. If we/Ben decide to rename System Settings, it should be done for our own sake. Personally I've thought for a while whether the name Workspace Settings would be better in line with our "Plasma Workspaces" branding. But how long until GNOME hijack that name again? Should _we_ retreat again? I'm sorry but cooperation is a mutual thing. Just like we don't use application names they already use, they should respect our names -- no matter how generic a name might be. We don't call our webcam application Cheese and force GNOME to rename their application to GNOME Cheese.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
2011/7/24 Ben Cooksley : > Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't > interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, > they're insular and only care for themselves. > > In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are > going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because > otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME > to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). > > A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are > bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be > trusted. > Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due > to the number of applicable panels and apps. > > As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself "System > Settings" under KDE, but would prefix "KDE" to the name under all > other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. > > I have recieved objections that this collides with the "branding > policy" however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who > object propose? > A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our > applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get > blamed for it. > > Regards, > Ben Cooksley > System Settings Maintainer > Hi Ben, Could you read and comment on my proposal: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131142514605051&w=2 I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it approved. I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple desktop files. If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? Just some guesses.. - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which one?) - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) Note: anyone is fine, not just Ben. Aiming at him since he started this mailing. Regards, Mark
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
A Segunda, 25 de Julho de 2011 11:56:01 Markus Slopianka você escreveu: > > Which settings don't they follow? Apart from theme (as there is no gtk3 > > engine written in Qt yet) > > Why do theme engines have to be written for Qt in order to let GTK apps at > least integrate visually into a Qt environment. There should be a Qt theme > loader in GTK just as there is a GTK theme loader in Qt. > > Well, other than that: GNOME/GTK apps don't integrate with the > Notifications panel, File Type Associations, Icon theme, CDDB config (for > media players or CD rippers), ... Well oxygen as Oxygen-style writen for gtk 3 already :) think it was anounced and if you use Oxygen as a gtk theme it will use oxygen icon theme as well the integration is pretty nice alamost confusing as some GTK apps look so native in kde you expect the exact same behaviour, example, for configuration setings. On a side note please people remember that the things the unite us are far greater than the litle tiny things that divided us. cheers... -- oxygen guy, "I make the pretty pictures"
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Hi, On Monday, 25. July 2011 02:37:15 Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote: > controls settings of the KDE runtime env/platform, is at least also one > who is insular and only cares for himself (or his workspace), no? No. The application author has the freedom to come up with a creative catchy name - even a generic term - for his application. But the duty of the application author is also to check _beforehand_ whether the name of his binary executable and the name of his application are 1. intuitively understood by the user 2. can easily be memorized by the user 3. are unique and don't clash with relevant and well-known _existing_ ones (or violate trademarks) It's not his duty to prevent possible future clashes regarding 3.) at the cost of 1.) or 2.). That would be overly paranoid and would just result in cryptic fancy names. This kind of research is common practice and it's the most basic kind of research every responsible and respectful programmer does. If such basic kind of research is missed - even more so in a well-known, directly competing project - I can fully understand if the maintainer of an already existing application reacts angrily and questions motivations. Best Regards, Torsten > Think > about it. At least to me System = > Shell/Workspace or OS/Computer even. > > And with my user hat on I would think this "Linux" is utterly shitty if I > have to use different setting programs for all the existing toolkits out > there, to do the same settings again and again. > I am only looking out to also see Tcl Settings, EFL Settings, Gnustep > Settings. Perhaps also some Motif Settings, to be old-school. Perfect! Not. > > If Joe user uses Unity and wants to use that hex editor Okteta someone > recommended to him, would/should he need to know about "KDE" and that > Okteta is implemented based on another toolkit than most of the default > programs? I say No, and guess most users don't care as well (unless > "toolkit racists"). And thus he should also not need to know he has to use > that other "System Settings" then the general system settings. > > > In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are > > going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because > > otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME > > to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). > > Well, the two desktop file solution might work, no? Name it "KDE System > Settings" or similar for non-Plasma envs in one file, and "System Settings" > for Plasma envs in the original one. Make that other file a patch for > 4.7.1. Or did I miss something? > > > A long term solution > > ... is to continue all the work that has been done to share as many > settings as possible, and to support running programs in not-the-native > environments, ideally without the need for a separate settings program for > the toolkit in use, using some sane defaults there if needed. > A big thanks for everyone who has done before or/and keeps pushing on this, > like Aurélien with the "kdeui/kernel: Use platform palette and fonts" > commit only last friday. > > And otherwise I completely agree with Cornelius. > > Cheers > Friedrich -- Torsten Rahn Senior Consultant basysKom GmbH Robert-Bosch-Str. 7 | 64293 Darmstadt | Germany Tel: +49 6151 3969-961 | Fax: -736| torsten.r...@basyskom.de | www.basyskom.de Handelsregister: Darmstadt HRB 9352 Geschaeftsfuehrung: Eva Brucherseifer
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:32 pm, Mark wrote: > Hi Ben, > > Could you read and comment on my proposal: > http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131142514605051&w=2 > I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need > some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it > approved. > > I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple > desktop files. > > If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? > Just some guesses.. > - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which > one?) > - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) > - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) This proposal is fine for technically literate users, and might provide a short term fix, but, as Friedrich has already pointed out, it is not good for a user who just uses whatever desktop happens to be installed on his/her system, and installs whichever applications seem suitable regardless of what desktop they come from. Such users won't necessarily know whether the application they are using is a KDE one or a Gnome one or something else. Faced with two alternative settings applications, say "System Settings" and "KDE System Settings"/"Gnome System Settings", that user would not realise the relevance of the Gnome/KDE System Settings, and would likely ignore it even if it happened to be the one needed for the application. The only long term solution for ordinary users is to have interoperability of settings between desktops, so that it won't matter which system settings application they use. Applications with more specialist needs, i.e. settings which aren't (yet) interoperable, would need to provide configuration of those settings from within the application. -- David Jarvie. KDE developer. KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:00 PM, David Jarvie wrote: > On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:32 pm, Mark wrote: >> Hi Ben, >> >> Could you read and comment on my proposal: >> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131142514605051&w=2 >> I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need >> some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it >> approved. >> >> I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple >> desktop files. >> >> If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? >> Just some guesses.. >> - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which >> one?) >> - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) >> - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) > > This proposal is fine for technically literate users, and might provide a > short term fix, but, as Friedrich has already pointed out, it is not good > for a user who just uses whatever desktop happens to be installed on > his/her system, and installs whichever applications seem suitable > regardless of what desktop they come from. Such users won't necessarily > know whether the application they are using is a KDE one or a Gnome one or > something else. Faced with two alternative settings applications, say > "System Settings" and "KDE System Settings"/"Gnome System Settings", that > user would not realise the relevance of the Gnome/KDE System Settings, and > would likely ignore it even if it happened to be the one needed for the > application. > > The only long term solution for ordinary users is to have interoperability > of settings between desktops, so that it won't matter which system > settings application they use. Applications with more specialist needs, > i.e. settings which aren't (yet) interoperable, would need to provide > configuration of those settings from within the application. I find it to be a long term solution to be honest.. However, the "best solution" should imho be a generic "System settings" application. Then another issue arrises.. If it's made in Qt the GTK/Gnome people probably don't want to use it. If it's written in GTK then Qt/KDE people probably don't want to use it. So what we need is a generic setting thing that is DE independent and doesn't use Qt or GTK (hmm, can dbus do something here?). Then a abstraction above it to make a Qt interface for the Qt apps and a GTK interface for the GTK apps. THEN on top of that a GUI can be made to show ALL settings for KDE, Gnome and whatever DE hooked into it. This is just some brainstorming in an email so it's probably quite vague. Certainly something that should get some more though :)
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Monday, July 25, 2011 12:19:19 Andrea Diamantini wrote: KCMsshould live in kde-runtime. Isn't it? they do. -- Aaron J. Seigo humru othro a kohnu se GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Il giorno dom, 24/07/2011 alle 22.17 +0200, Aurélien Gâteau ha scritto: > Le 24/07/2011 17:11, Emmanuele Bassi a écrit : > > GTK+ applications use the XSETTINGS keys: > > > > http://standards.freedesktop.org/xsettings-spec/xsettings-spec-0.5.html > > > > so every key that is shared using that specification is picked up > > automatically by GTK+ applications. > > > > we can definitely talk about extending the set of shared keys: we > > routinely do that on xdg-list -- for instance when the sound theme > > spec was introduced. > > The spec does not provide a list of shared keys, does such a list exist? > If there is no such list I don't see how we could share anything. http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/XSettingsRegistry > I don't know what is shared right now but it is definitely not enough: a > GTK application running on a KDE workspace does not follow KDE > keybindings, palette, fonts, icon theme, label alignment or dialog > button order. > > Additionally I don't believe a shared keys system is enough to share a > widget theme. Otherwise the Oxygen devs probably wouldn't have created > the Oxygen GTK theme. Of course, you would need to create a KDE theme. XSettings is just for choosing which theme among many. Giovanni signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Thomas Zander wrote: >On Monday 25 July 2011 07.49.17 Scott Kitterman wrote: >> I haven't seen anything in any mailing list posts that is nearly as >> aggressive as knowningly reusing a name that was in use like >> systemsettings. > >Please don't assume that was an agressive act. > >I can totally see that someone that goes with the assumption that a >piece of >software is only usable on one desktop won't have problems if you call >a >similar piece of software the same on your desktop. > >In general; please stop assuming ;) (ask politely first) It was stated up front that Gnome was aware of the naming conflict when they did it and there was zero advance communication, so I don't think I'm assuming anything. Scott K
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Hi Mark, have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131149560119520&w=2 I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Mark wrote: > 2011/7/24 Ben Cooksley : >> Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't >> interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, >> they're insular and only care for themselves. >> >> In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are >> going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because >> otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME >> to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). >> >> A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are >> bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be >> trusted. >> Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due >> to the number of applicable panels and apps. >> >> As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself "System >> Settings" under KDE, but would prefix "KDE" to the name under all >> other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. >> >> I have recieved objections that this collides with the "branding >> policy" however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who >> object propose? >> A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our >> applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get >> blamed for it. >> >> Regards, >> Ben Cooksley >> System Settings Maintainer >> > > Hi Ben, > > Could you read and comment on my proposal: > http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131142514605051&w=2 > I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need > some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it > approved. > > I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple > desktop files. > > If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? > Just some guesses.. > - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which one?) > - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) > - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) > > Note: anyone is fine, not just Ben. Aiming at him since he started this > mailing. > > Regards, > Mark >
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Hi Mark, Yes, you are right about the X- part. However, I now think that the Freedesktop specification could be extended in a more generic way. I suggest updating the spec such that any (!) non-(-X) key of form (for example) Specific--= is to be interpreted as =Value, in the environment called , possibly overriding the generic definition of this key. Such an extension would allow any attribute to have DE-specific values, not just the name. For example, GenericName, and even Exec (for DE-specific su maybe?). A desktop file would then look like: Name=System Settings Specific-KDE-Name=KDE System Settings Regards, Ambroz On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Mark wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? >> >> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131149560119520&w=2 >> >> I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to >> update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its >> programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). >> >> (sorry if you get this message twice, I only sent it to the mailing list >> once) >> >> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Mark wrote: >>> 2011/7/24 Ben Cooksley : Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, they're insular and only care for themselves. In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be trusted. Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due to the number of applicable panels and apps. As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself "System Settings" under KDE, but would prefix "KDE" to the name under all other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. I have recieved objections that this collides with the "branding policy" however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who object propose? A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get blamed for it. Regards, Ben Cooksley System Settings Maintainer >>> >>> Hi Ben, >>> >>> Could you read and comment on my proposal: >>> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131142514605051&w=2 >>> I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need >>> some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it >>> approved. >>> >>> I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple >>> desktop files. >>> >>> If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? >>> Just some guesses.. >>> - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which one?) >>> - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) >>> - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) >>> >>> Note: anyone is fine, not just Ben. Aiming at him since he started this >>> mailing. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Mark >>> >> > > Hi, > > Sorry, i haven't seen the last one (just missed it since it is there). > Your idea is "slightly" wrong (sorry for nitpicking ;)) > It should be > X-KDE-Name > X-Gnome-Name > > That is allowed by the spec. > > Your idea is nice and would fix it but i still think this should be > added to the official spec. Your suggestion is more like an unofficial > addition to the spec that any DE should follow anyway. > As for patches. I'm perfectly fine with making the patches for KDE, > Gnome, XFCE and whatever.. That can't be that much of a task anyway. > > Kind regards, > Mark >
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: > Hi Mark, > have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? > > http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131149560119520&w=2 > > I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to > update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its > programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Mark wrote: >> 2011/7/24 Ben Cooksley : >>> Dropping GNOME out of this, as it seems quite clear they aren't >>> interested in co-operating at all. Which is fairly typical for them, >>> they're insular and only care for themselves. >>> >>> In any case, we need a short term solution to this. Basically, we are >>> going to have to provide a different name under GNOME, because >>> otherwise GNOME users will complain to distros, who will patch GNOME >>> to ignore System Settings (I refuse to acknowledge their app). >>> >>> A long term solution, sharing settings isn't even counted, as they are >>> bound to screw us over yet again in some way. They are not to be >>> trusted. >>> Adding the panels apps need to them isn't exactly workable either due >>> to the number of applicable panels and apps. >>> >>> As was proposed earlier, System Settings would call itself "System >>> Settings" under KDE, but would prefix "KDE" to the name under all >>> other environments. ie. KDE System Settings under xfce. >>> >>> I have recieved objections that this collides with the "branding >>> policy" however. Given such an objection, what do those of you who >>> object propose? >>> A solution must be reached, otherwise it is the users of our >>> applications who will ultimately suffer - and we will probably get >>> blamed for it. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Ben Cooksley >>> System Settings Maintainer >>> >> >> Hi Ben, >> >> Could you read and comment on my proposal: >> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131142514605051&w=2 >> I would like to implement this in the spec, KDE en Gnome, but i need >> some pointers on where i should make such edits and to get it >> approved. >> >> I think that is the most sane solution that doesn't require multiple >> desktop files. >> >> If you agree on this, what do i need to do next? >> Just some guesses.. >> - Propose the updated standard in the freedesktop mailing list (which one?) >> - Make patched for KDE (which component? where? file?) >> - Make patches for gnome (which component? where? file?) >> >> Note: anyone is fine, not just Ben. Aiming at him since he started this >> mailing. >> >> Regards, >> Mark >> > Yes... old mail just getting send now?
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:50 pm, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: > Hi Mark, > have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? > > http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131149560119520&w=2 > > I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to > update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its > programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). This proposal has the same drawbacks as Mark's - it is aimed at knowledgeable users, not the ordinary user who may not be aware of which desktop a particular application is from. See http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131159889604990&w=2. -- David Jarvie. KDE developer. KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
David Jarvie wrote: > On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:50 pm, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? >> >> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131149560119520&w=2 >> >> I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to >> update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its >> programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). > > This proposal has the same drawbacks as Mark's - it is aimed at > knowledgeable users, not the ordinary user who may not be aware of which > desktop a particular application is from. See > http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131159889604990&w=2. So what is *your* proposed solution? As you say, the long term solution is to have setting interoperability. The key words there are "long term". We can't do that *now*, before the new KDE release and before the new GNOME release. We need a solution *now* to avoid having two entries with the exact same name in the application list. Mark and Ambroz's solutions have the advantage of not requiring months of collaboration and programming, which would be needed for setting interoperability. -- Nicolas
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, 25.07.11 17:40, Giovanni Campagna (scampa.giova...@gmail.com) wrote: > > The spec does not provide a list of shared keys, does such a list exist? > > If there is no such list I don't see how we could share anything. > > http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/XSettingsRegistry This isn't really up-to-date as it appears. These are the settings that Gtk currently knows: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/tree/gdk/x11/gdksettings.c#n37 Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 6:50 PM, David Jarvie wrote: > On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:50 pm, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? >> >> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131149560119520&w=2 >> >> I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to >> update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its >> programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). > > This proposal has the same drawbacks as Mark's - it is aimed at > knowledgeable users, not the ordinary user who may not be aware of which > desktop a particular application is from. See > http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131159889604990&w=2. > > -- > David Jarvie. > KDE developer. > KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm > > Do you mind sharing your solution? Thanx.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon 25 July 2011 06:53:28 Alvaro Soliverez wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Monday 25 July 2011 15:57:16 Ben Cooksley wrote: > >> >> Otherwise our users will be the ones who will suffer. > >> > > >> > I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... This > >> > NamingClashCrisis is more>> > >> They will. As an example, KMyMoney users for instance depend on System > >> Settings to be able to set their locale, and therefore the default > >> currency, date format, etc. > > > > In that case KMyMoney has to depend on systemsettings and has to become > > a workspace application which I think the workspace coordinators will > > rightfully refuse. If this is a must have configuration for KMyMoney it > > has to add the KCM to its own configuration options. In comparison you > > are also able to configure Phonon from within Amarok. > Be senseful, please. Any application that depends on locale settings > needs a way to set that correctly. > > I can tell the user to open a terminal, run kcmshell4 somethings, and > make the required change. Or, I can tell to open Systemsettings, > and adjust locale settings. Or you could embed the locale settings KCM in the KMyMoney settings dialogs. KCMs are nice for a reason, and that reason is integration. So that IMPROVES your user experience, because instead of having to open some OTHER application, you tell them to open the KMyMoney configuration dialogs. r > BTW, this is a very common support situation, and personally, I will > very deeply hate the person responsible for making it even more > difficult to support my users under a different, which we do have, and > a lot of them. > > So, it's not a matter that there is an alternative way to do it. It's > the matter that so far, it was very easy to point them to a solution, > and now it's not. > > And existing solution on forums and otherwise, now won't work. > > And all that just because they chose a name that has been in use for > over 4 years by their closest partner. > > So, as an application developer, you can bikeshed all you want, but at > the end of the day, Gnome devs have made my life more difficult. > > Regards, > Alvaro > > KMyMoney development team -- Ryan Rix -- http://rix.si == OpenSource.com: Where Open Source Happens! = _ \/"/_ All Hail the Beefy Miracle! /_/ \ \ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Ryan Rix wrote: > On Mon 25 July 2011 06:53:28 Alvaro Soliverez wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: >> > On Monday 25 July 2011 15:57:16 Ben Cooksley wrote: >> >> >> Otherwise our users will be the ones who will suffer. >> >> > >> >> > I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... This >> >> > NamingClashCrisis is more>> >> >> They will. As an example, KMyMoney users for instance depend on System >> >> Settings to be able to set their locale, and therefore the default >> >> currency, date format, etc. >> > >> > In that case KMyMoney has to depend on systemsettings and has to become >> > a workspace application which I think the workspace coordinators will >> > rightfully refuse. If this is a must have configuration for KMyMoney it >> > has to add the KCM to its own configuration options. In comparison you >> > are also able to configure Phonon from within Amarok. >> Be senseful, please. Any application that depends on locale settings >> needs a way to set that correctly. >> >> I can tell the user to open a terminal, run kcmshell4 somethings, and >> make the required change. Or, I can tell to open Systemsettings, >> and adjust locale settings. > > Or you could embed the locale settings KCM in the KMyMoney settings dialogs. > KCMs are nice for a reason, and that reason is integration. > > So that IMPROVES your user experience, because instead of having to open some > OTHER application, you tell them to open the KMyMoney configuration dialogs. > > r Ryan, I appreciate the effort to see the glass half full, and we'll probably go that way in the end. The little unimportant thing is that we are in the final days for a release in the first days of August. Like everyone else, this has hit us unexpectedly and late in the release cycle. We'll live through it, but I don't like this "KDE apps in Gnome should behave", but Gnome feels no obligation to behave with us. I look forward to a nice long-term solution, and we'll manage to find a short-term one, but me not happy. Regards, Alvaro
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 25 July 2011 07:18, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > Thomas Zander wrote: > >>On Monday 25 July 2011 07.49.17 Scott Kitterman wrote: >>> I haven't seen anything in any mailing list posts that is nearly as >>> aggressive as knowningly reusing a name that was in use like >>> systemsettings. >> >>Please don't assume that was an agressive act. >> >>I can totally see that someone that goes with the assumption that a >>piece of >>software is only usable on one desktop won't have problems if you call >>a >>similar piece of software the same on your desktop. >> >>In general; please stop assuming ;) (ask politely first) > > It was stated up front that Gnome was aware of the naming conflict when they > did it and there was zero advance communication, so I don't think I'm > assuming anything. Scott, yes you are assuming. The fact is that Gnome used the same name as KDE for their user-visible configuration app. There is no evidence however that they did so to aggressively and intentionally cause conflict. They probably just thought it was a good name. You seem to have a deep mistrust of Gnome that in the absence of evidence you interpret Gnome's actions as malicious instead of being done in good faith. A similar event happened years ago except that KDE took Gnome's name. Gnome had its System Monitor by 2002, ksysguard was renamed to System Monitor 4.5 years later. Notably, neither app has its OnlyShowIn key set so this is actually the very same problem (except that both apps effectively do the same thing which isn't the case for systemsettings). http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-system-monitor/commit/?id=a2ef5a0d37719f8610045508c33fec6d8dccf06b http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdebase/workspace/ksysguard/gui/ksysguard.desktop?r1=548992&r2=589532&pathrev=961381 There's no evidence to believe that KDE was trying to cause a conflict then, nor is there any evidence that Gnome is doing that now. Unproven allegations like these encourage the criticized party to get defensive and start attacking back, or just not want to listen. Please look for solutions instead of conspiracies. Jeremy Bicha
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
> [: Mark :] > Just a small suggestion on how i think this should be "fixed" (since 2 > desktop files for one app seems just ugly to me). Perhaps it's better to > extend the desktop file specification: > [...] > Name=System Settings > NativeDE=KDE > NameNonNative=KDE System Settings Adding new field into .desktop specification would have a ripple effect. You have already felt that with KDesktopFile::readName(), and it would also be necessary to update localization systems, several of which are in use. This means that a new field should be added to .desktop specification only when it is obvious that it serves a general and permanent purpose. This purpose is not such. As for double .desktop files, I think that the ugliness of the solution matches well the stupidity of the problem. -- Chusslove Illich (Часлав Илић) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 07/25/2011 04:53 PM, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: On Monday, July 25, 2011 12:19:19 Andrea Diamantini wrote: KCMsshould live in kde-runtime. Isn't it? they do. So, it's just my bad luck the ones I use (cookies, proxy, cache) are not. Working for a solution... -- Andrea Diamantini, adjam GPG Fingerprint: 57DE 8E32 7D1A 0E16 AA52 59D8 84F9 3ECD DBF9 730F rekonq project WEB: http://rekonq.kde.org IRC: rekonq@freenode
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Le 25/07/2011 19:51, Lennart Poettering a écrit : > On Mon, 25.07.11 17:40, Giovanni Campagna (scampa.giova...@gmail.com) wrote: > >>> The spec does not provide a list of shared keys, does such a list exist? >>> If there is no such list I don't see how we could share anything. >> >> http://wiki.freedesktop.org/wiki/Specifications/XSettingsRegistry > > This isn't really up-to-date as it appears. > > These are the settings that Gtk currently knows: > > http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/tree/gdk/x11/gdksettings.c#n37 Thanks for the pointers. The IconThemeName in particular will be quite useful for me. Aurélien
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Mon, July 25, 2011 8:08 pm, Nicolas Alvarez wrote: > David Jarvie wrote: >> On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:50 pm, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: >>> Hi Mark, >>> have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? >>> >>> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131149560119520&w=2 >>> >>> I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to >>> update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its >>> programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). >> >> This proposal has the same drawbacks as Mark's - it is aimed at >> knowledgeable users, not the ordinary user who may not be aware of which >> desktop a particular application is from. See >> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131159889604990&w=2. > > So what is *your* proposed solution? > > As you say, the long term solution is to have setting interoperability. > The > key words there are "long term". We can't do that *now*, before the new > KDE > release and before the new GNOME release. We need a solution *now* to > avoid > having two entries with the exact same name in the application list. > > Mark and Ambroz's solutions have the advantage of not requiring months of > collaboration and programming, which would be needed for setting > interoperability. I don't object to Mark's proposal as a short term solution - it's better than having two identically named applications. I'm just concerned that it isn't ideal from the ordinary user's perspective, and that it should be recognised as being an interim fix. The longer term aim should of course be to share as many as possible of the settings between desktops and therefore make them accessible from both Gnome and KDE System Settings applications. KCMs should be categorised according to whether or not they contain settings which are not shared between desktops, and applications using unshared settings should as a matter of policy be expected to provide direct access to the relevant KCMs, thus avoiding the need for the user to find and run the 'other' System Settings. -- David Jarvie. KDE developer. KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 12:32 PM, David Jarvie wrote: > On Mon, July 25, 2011 8:08 pm, Nicolas Alvarez wrote: >> David Jarvie wrote: >>> On Mon, July 25, 2011 12:50 pm, Ambroz Bizjak wrote: Hi Mark, have you seen my proposed improvement on your suggestion? http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131149560119520&w=2 I suggest that you consider it, because it would avoid having to update the Freedesktop specification and any DE that doesn't name its programs differently in other DEs (e.g. Xfce). >>> >>> This proposal has the same drawbacks as Mark's - it is aimed at >>> knowledgeable users, not the ordinary user who may not be aware of which >>> desktop a particular application is from. See >>> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131159889604990&w=2. >> >> So what is *your* proposed solution? >> >> As you say, the long term solution is to have setting interoperability. >> The >> key words there are "long term". We can't do that *now*, before the new >> KDE >> release and before the new GNOME release. We need a solution *now* to >> avoid >> having two entries with the exact same name in the application list. >> >> Mark and Ambroz's solutions have the advantage of not requiring months of >> collaboration and programming, which would be needed for setting >> interoperability. > > I don't object to Mark's proposal as a short term solution - it's better > than having two identically named applications. I'm just concerned that it > isn't ideal from the ordinary user's perspective, and that it should be > recognised as being an interim fix. > > The longer term aim should of course be to share as many as possible of > the settings between desktops and therefore make them accessible from both > Gnome and KDE System Settings applications. KCMs should be categorised > according to whether or not they contain settings which are not shared > between desktops, and applications using unshared settings should as a > matter of policy be expected to provide direct access to the relevant > KCMs, thus avoiding the need for the user to find and run the 'other' > System Settings. > > -- > David Jarvie. > KDE developer. > KAlarm author - http://www.astrojar.org.uk/kalarm > > In my opinion there should be a cross desktop system settings application where the KDE implementation can use KCM and the gnome implementation uses whatever they want to use. That would be the ideal solution imho.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Monday, 2011-07-25, Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:36 PM, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > > On Monday 25 July 2011 15:57:16 Ben Cooksley wrote: > >> >> Otherwise our users will be the ones who will suffer. > >> > > >> > I really doubt anyone is going to 'suffer'... This NamingClashCrisis > >> > is more > >> > >> They will. As an example, KMyMoney users for instance depend on System > >> Settings to be able to set their locale, and therefore the default > >> currency, date format, etc. > > > > In that case KMyMoney has to depend on systemsettings and has to become a > > workspace application which I think the workspace coordinators will > > rightfully refuse. If this is a must have configuration for KMyMoney it > > has to add the KCM to its own configuration options. In comparison you > > are also able to configure Phonon from within Amarok. > > > > If you think that systemsettings is a required runtime dependency for > > other applications, then systemmsettings should move from kde-workspace > > to kde-runtime. > > I didn't choose it to be a runtime dependency. Ideally it wouldn't > have to be. It became a "defacto" requirement as applications for KDE > are usually developed under KDE, therefore developers don't know to > add all the needed panels to their application. While it is true that KDE application developers are usually not concerned about which panels of system settings control infrastructure behavior they are using, adding the panels to the applications is IMHO not always the correct approach. On the example of user default locale, there is almost certainly some way of configuring that with the running workspace's tools, i.e. always configured outside the apps for all apps. Cheers, Kevin -- Kevin Krammer, KDE developer, xdg-utils developer KDE user support, developer mentoring signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Il giorno lun, 25/07/2011 alle 12.56 +0200, Markus Slopianka ha scritto: > > Which settings don't they follow? Apart from theme (as there is no gtk3 > > engine written in Qt yet) > > Why do theme engines have to be written for Qt in order to let GTK apps at > least integrate > visually into a Qt environment. There should be a Qt theme loader in GTK just > as there is > a GTK theme loader in Qt. Well, I think that an hypothetical KDE-looking GTK theme would use Qt calls to paint widget, same as the GNOME-looking Qt theme paints using gtk_paint_*. > Well, other than that: GNOME/GTK apps don't integrate with the Notifications > panel, File > Type Associations, Icon theme, CDDB config (for media players or CD rippers), > ... Gtk apps normally use either libnotify, libappindicator or GtkStatusIcon (systray protocol). All of them are supported by KDE, AFAIK. File type associations are from xdg-mime/shared-mime-info, and should be shared by all freedesktop toolkits. Icon theme is taken from XSettings, you just need to export it, like Xfce and Lxde do. As for CDDB config, I don't think GNOME as something shared across the desktop for that. Giovanni signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 01:26:03PM +0200, Mark Gaiser wrote: > In my opinion there should be a cross desktop system settings > application where the KDE implementation can use KCM and the gnome > implementation uses whatever they want to use. That would be the > ideal solution imho. > you mean, like two "date & time settings" "applets" inside the same "shell" application? ;)
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 01:26:03PM +0200, Mark Gaiser wrote: >> In my opinion there should be a cross desktop system settings >> application where the KDE implementation can use KCM and the gnome >> implementation uses whatever they want to use. That would be the >> ideal solution imho. >> > you mean, like two "date & time settings" "applets" inside the same > "shell" application? ;) > wahahaha no, since that would mean the settings are not only stored in one app, but also shown in one place.. My idea is to have them stored in one central place so that each app can access it without the need of pulling in an entire desktop just for a setting. A nice side effect then is that it becomes possible to implement a cross desktop system settings where you would still have a desktop category first before you get all the settings. Kinda hard to explain..
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 2011-07-23 Matthias wrote: > On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 5:53 PM, Jeremy Bicha wrote: > > On 22 July 2011 17:17, Ben Cooksley wrote: > > > > To be more specific about the problem, installing kde-workspace to > > a GNOME installation results in 2 indistinguishable apps named > > System Settings and 2 named System Monitor. On Ubuntu at least, if > > I want the GNOME version, I have to remember to click the first > > System Monitor but the second System Setting which is awfully > > frustrating. Here's a screenshot from my Ubuntu install: > > https://launchpadlibrarian.net/75745040/Gnome%20Shell%20screnshot.p > > ng > > This is what happens when you mix and match bits and pieces from > different operating systems. There is really not much that can be > done about it. Since that is what both KDE and GNOME are trying to > do: build complete, self-contained systems. Arguably, KDE is a > little further along, with their big monolithic modules like > kde-workspace that drag in most of the desktop, while GNOME apps can > often still be installed without much of the desktop. Oh, come on. Both projects do that because of some incredibly silly attitude where everything that's from "the other side" is evil. And while that attitude is not universal. this tread (starting with the tone of Ben's mail) shows clearly many people still have that silly idea which leads to idiotic things like two calculators, two places to configure the language of the apps etcetera. How far have we, Free Software contributors, sunk, if KDE and GNOME apps work better under and integrate better in Windows and Mac OS X then they do ON THE SAME OS running in each other's desktop? I say VERY DEEP. Wake up. THe user doesn't give about the toolkit their app is written in. And they HATE the confusing situation KDE and GNOME purposely create (yes, it's on purpose and you all know it) by needlessly duplicating things and making it harder to run apps from one in the other. We've all seen countless installations of either KDE or GNOME where apps 'from the other side' look and work horrible. If KDE and GNOME can use the native Mac and Windows file dialogs, why can't they use each others dialogs? To name just one silly thing... Imho Ben's mail and the tone there-in was inpolite and uncalled for. And so was the tone many responses. Sigh. > > I'd like to suggest that the GNOME developers consider changing the > > public name of their app to "System Preferences." This matches the > > Mac OS X design and arguably GNOME follows some parts of OS X > > design. Furthermore, it is more in line with Gnome 2's > > System>Preferences and System>Administration. > > That is an absurd proposal. What next, rename gnome-terminal to > 'Commandline Window' because Xfce also ships a 'Terminal' ?! > Generic names don't come with exclusive ownership... Each desktop team should stop picking such generic names. gnome-terminal is fine, so is Konsole. Terminal should probably be renamed. NetworkManager is a braindead name, System Settings implies far more than it accomplishes (it can't handle much 'system settings') so it doesn't seem very smart either. Shaun's proposal is a work-around which would probably be 'good enough' but the root cause is that all DE teams try to create their own little world, going "LALALA I DON'T SEE YOU" about the rest of the world. > And as has already been pointed out, offering the user a meaningless > choice between 'System Settings' and 'System Preferences' is no less > of a failure than having 2 identical items. That I agree with. KDE systemsettings has made a good step, being able to configure some aspects of GNOME apps (make them integrate better in a Plasma workspace). More of that is needed on both sides, OR a nice, generic config tool should be written which handles everything on both sides. Grtz Jos signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 07:44:54AM +0200, Jos Poortvliet wrote: > Each desktop team should stop picking such generic names. gnome-terminal > is fine, so is Konsole. Terminal should probably be renamed. > NetworkManager is a braindead name, System Settings implies far more > than it accomplishes (it can't handle much 'system settings') so it > doesn't seem very smart either. gnome-terminal is called gnome-terminal. Just not in the menu. In the menu we give it an understandable name and limit it to GNOME only. This is not going to change. The debate about things like baobab or 'Disk Usage Analyzer' was held within GNOME a long time ago. There was a general consensus that we don't want to show the actual name except in Help->About. Everything else (menu, window title, etc) uses something which is understandable. Meaning 'Disk Usage Analyzer' and 'Terminal'. > Shaun's proposal is a work-around which would probably be 'good enough' > but the root cause is that all DE teams try to create their own little > world, going "LALALA I DON'T SEE YOU" about the rest of the world. Care is taken not to cause confusion when using another desktop (NotShowIn + OnlyShowIn). For things part of GNOME Core, we will keep on using understandable names. I can understand that some people want to have a mix and match of e.g. core applications. They're free to do so and nothing is done to prevent that (though it might take a small amount of effort). Further I can also understand that some people prefer so see gnome-terminal and konsole in the menu. However, that is not our goal. We want something simple. For everything part of GNOME Core we have say what it does instead of putting the git module name in the menu. For gnome-control-center specifically, it should pretty much configure everything in the OS. Same for the KDE one. Furthermore, working together on ensuring things are handled in a consistent way across all desktops is something that we has been worked upon by various people across various desktops for many years. Probably some things can/could've been done better, but let's just continue working together. For menu entries: we'll keep using 'Terminal', 'Disk Usage Analyser', etc (+NotShowIn/OnlyShowIn of course). -- Regards, Olav (speaking as a release-team member)
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Monday, July 25, 2011 10:30:46 Lydia Pintscher wrote: > This whole debate is way too heated and I'd like to take this out ofthe > arena. Are there 2 or 3 people on the GNOME side that areavailable to talk > this through and find a solution? Ideally whoevermaintains system settings > on the GNOME side would be one of them.I'd like to work with them and Ben on > finding a good solution. Has anyone stepped up for this yet? It's something that deserves resolution and Lydia is willing to help facilitate, now we just need the relevant people involved to participate. I don't foresee it being a long process, but one that ought to be taken on and gotten out of the way. Hopefully those involved in the relevant GNOME and the KDE projects can appreciate this on behalf of our users and, with Lydia's help in keeping things constructive and out of the bikeshed, we can quickly put this behind us and move on to bigger and better things. :) Cheers ... -- Aaron J. Seigo humru othro a kohnu se GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 8:04 AM, Aaron J. Seigo wrote: > On Monday, July 25, 2011 10:30:46 Lydia Pintscher wrote: >> This whole debate is way too heated and I'd like to take this out ofthe >> arena. Are there 2 or 3 people on the GNOME side that areavailable to talk >> this through and find a solution? Ideally whoevermaintains system settings >> on the GNOME side would be one of them.I'd like to work with them and Ben on >> finding a good solution. > > Has anyone stepped up for this yet? > > It's something that deserves resolution and Lydia is willing to help > facilitate, now we just need the relevant people involved to participate. I > don't foresee it being a long process, but one that ought to be taken on and > gotten out of the way. Hopefully those involved in the relevant GNOME and the > KDE projects can appreciate this on behalf of our users and, with Lydia's help > in keeping things constructive and out of the bikeshed, we can quickly put > this behind us and move on to bigger and better things. :) > > Cheers ... > > -- > Aaron J. Seigo > humru othro a kohnu se > GPG Fingerprint: 8B8B 2209 0C6F 7C47 B1EA EE75 D6B7 2EB1 A7F1 DB43 > > KDE core developer sponsored by Qt Development Frameworks > Perhaps the involved people from KDE and Gnome should just sit down in an IRC chat room and talk about it. note: congrats on the KDE 4.7 release!
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:07, Mark wrote: > Perhaps the involved people from KDE and Gnome should just sit down in > an IRC chat room and talk about it. That is pretty much exactly what I'm trying to organize. But I need to know who that would be from the GNOME-side. > note: congrats on the KDE 4.7 release! Thanks! Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher KDE Community Working Group member http://kde.org - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:24, Olav Vitters wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:11:32AM +0200, Lydia Pintscher wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:07, Mark wrote: >> > Perhaps the involved people from KDE and Gnome should just sit down in >> > an IRC chat room and talk about it. >> >> That is pretty much exactly what I'm trying to organize. But I need to >> know who that would be from the GNOME-side. > > gnome-control-center maintainers are listed at: > http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-control-center/tree/gnome-control-center.doap > > and to see who actually commits things: > http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-control-center/log Thanks Olav. I'll send some emails. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher KDE Community Working Group member http://kde.org - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Am Thu, 28 Jul 2011 01:15:46 +0200 schrieb Olav Vitters : > However, that is not our goal. We want something simple. For > everything part of GNOME Core we have say what it does instead of > putting the git module name in the menu. I thought that was what the GenericName entry was supposed to be good for, so gnome-terminal.desktop would have Name=GNOME Terminal GenericName=Terminal Exec=gnome-terminal and the runner/menu could use the GenericName unless there's a clash (cause konsole's GenericName is Terminal as well) where it could fall back to the Name enties for disambiguation. So my question regarding all this flood in my inbox would be: Does gnome-control-center now use "System Settings" for the GenericName or the Name entry of gnome-control-center so whether there's a real issue with disambiguation (as long as you want to avoid invoking the Exec string) or just "runner/menu xyz is too stupid to resolve ambiguities"? Cheers, Thomas
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:11:32AM +0200, Lydia Pintscher wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 10:07, Mark wrote: > > Perhaps the involved people from KDE and Gnome should just sit down in > > an IRC chat room and talk about it. > > That is pretty much exactly what I'm trying to organize. But I need to > know who that would be from the GNOME-side. gnome-control-center maintainers are listed at: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-control-center/tree/gnome-control-center.doap and to see who actually commits things: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-control-center/log -- Regards, Olav
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 28 July 2011 08:51, Thomas Lübking wrote: > I thought that was what the GenericName entry was supposed to be good > for, so gnome-terminal.desktop would have > > Name=GNOME Terminal > GenericName=Terminal > Exec=gnome-terminal > > and the runner/menu could use the GenericName unless there's a > clash (cause konsole's GenericName is Terminal as well) where it > could fall back to the Name enties for disambiguation. > > So my question regarding all this flood in my inbox would be: > > Does gnome-control-center now use "System Settings" for > the GenericName or the Name entry of gnome-control-center so whether > there's a real issue with disambiguation (as long as you want to avoid > invoking the Exec string) or just "runner/menu xyz is too stupid to > resolve ambiguities"? Here's what the .desktop files look like: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-control-center/tree/shell/gnome-control-center.desktop.in.in https://projects.kde.org/projects/kde/kdebase/kde-workspace/repository/revisions/master/annotate/systemsettings/app/systemsettings.desktop Jeremy Bicha
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
Hello Ben, On Fri, 2011-07-22 at 20:21 +1200, Ben Cooksley wrote: > To all concerned developers, > > As you may or may not be aware, the name "System Settings" for an > application is currently in use by KDE. A recent renaming by your > GNOME control center developers to this name creates a naming > conflict. This naming conflict will cause severe problems for users as > a result. It will also cause problems for those members of the KDE > Community supporting the usage of KDE applications on GNOME, as it > will not be possible to adjust the settings used by KDE applications. > > This will be because they will both appear, leading to GNOME > packagers stupidly patching the system to not show the KDE System > Settings under GNOME. > > As KDE occupied this name first, it is ours as a result, and I will > NOT be relinquishing it to satisfy your personal (selfish) desires, > which will cause numerous problems for users on both sides. > System Settings cannot just be shown on KDE, as the application is > used to configure multiple settings shared between KDE applications > such as Localisation (language, region, currency, calendar), Style, > Colours, Fonts among others. > > As KDE System Settings maintainer, I request that you immediately > rename it once again to another name which is not in conflict. I believe the problem was resolved without requiring any changes on the GNOME side (from reading the thread). Let me know if there's still things you think should be discussed. Cheers /One of the gnome-control-center maintainers back from holidays
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
I think what is needed is a series of more specific alternate names in a .desktop file, with more levels than the current GenericName and Name. By default, applications get the simplest name. If there is a collision, *both* get promoted to the next most specific name. E.g. you might have name1=Image Viewer name2=Image Viewer (kview) name3=Image Viewer (kview 3.5.9) while another application might have name1=Image Viewer name2=Image Viewer (xv) name3=Image Viewer (xv 3.10a) So if you only have one application of a particular type installed, you get the simple generic name. If you have multiples, you get to choose between Amarok, Clementine, Rhythmbox, Banshee, Gudyadequ, alsaplayer, etc. In the current dispute, it would be "System Settings (KDE)" and "System Settings (Gnome)". A user would only see the disambiguation suffix if they had both installed. You might even, as in the example I gave, include the version number so you can install multiple versions at once. (The overdesigner in me is thinking of an alternate menu implementation that uses the collising name as a submenu name, and the more specific names an entries below that, but maybe KISS is more appropriate here. Certainly even a design that *allows* such a thing should also allow not bothering.) This nicely avoids trying to divide desktops into "primarily Gnome" or "primarily KDE" to decide who gets the generic name. The answer is that nobody does. If I share an office with Joe Bloggs and Joe Shmoe, then I'm going to use their more specific names to refer to *both* of them. One naming suggestion I'd make would be that a pre-beta piece of software should probably avoid using the fully generic name, until it's stable and feature-complete enough to be the only such tool on a non-technical user's system.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On 4 August 2011 07:27, George Spelvin wrote: > I think what is needed is a series of more specific alternate names in > a .desktop file, with more levels than the current GenericName and Name. I think the KDE system settings desktop file just needs an addition of: OnlyShowIn=KDE; Richard.
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: > On 4 August 2011 07:27, George Spelvin wrote: >> I think what is needed is a series of more specific alternate names in >> a .desktop file, with more levels than the current GenericName and Name. > > I think the KDE system settings desktop file just needs an addition of: > > OnlyShowIn=KDE; > > Richard. > It has already been explained why this is not sufficient. System settings is needed to configure many aspects of KDE programs. Doing this will leave Gnome users unable to configure any KDE programs they use. -Todd
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 13:47 +0200, todd rme wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: > > On 4 August 2011 07:27, George Spelvin wrote: > >> I think what is needed is a series of more specific alternate names in > >> a .desktop file, with more levels than the current GenericName and Name. > > > > I think the KDE system settings desktop file just needs an addition of: > > > > OnlyShowIn=KDE; > > > > Richard. > > > > It has already been explained why this is not sufficient. System > settings is needed to configure many aspects of KDE programs. Doing > this will leave Gnome users unable to configure any KDE programs they > use. I already pointed out a solution that makes it "System Settings" in KDE and "KDE System Settings" in other desktops. The KDE developers seemed to agree to this. The problem is solved. Please let's end this thread and get back to writing great free software. Thanks, Shaun
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 13:47 +0200, todd rme wrote: > On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: > > On 4 August 2011 07:27, George Spelvin wrote: > >> I think what is needed is a series of more specific alternate names in > >> a .desktop file, with more levels than the current GenericName and Name. > > > > I think the KDE system settings desktop file just needs an addition of: > > > > OnlyShowIn=KDE; > > > > Richard. > > > > It has already been explained why this is not sufficient. System > settings is needed to configure many aspects of KDE programs. Doing > this will leave Gnome users unable to configure any KDE programs they > use. I already pointed out a solution that makes it "System Settings" in KDE and "KDE System Settings" in other desktops. The KDE developers seemed to agree to this. The problem is solved. Please let's end this thread and get back to writing great free software. Thanks, Shaun
Re: Formal complaint concerning the use of the name "System Settings" by GNOME
If anyone is interested in my proposal for DE-specific keys, I've written a proposal for how the Desktop Entry Specification could be updated. This support could be used to implement the naming mentioned, that is calling it "System Settings" in KDE, and "KDE System Settings" elsewhere - without new desktop files. I'm attaching the proposal. However, I do not have the time or willpower to argue for it. If someone finds it useful, feel free to make something out of it. (implementing it, however, is trivial) For my original suggestion, see http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-core-devel&m=131160689716557&w=2 (but the example there is accidentally inverted). On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Shaun McCance wrote: > On Wed, 2011-08-10 at 13:47 +0200, todd rme wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: >> > On 4 August 2011 07:27, George Spelvin wrote: >> >> I think what is needed is a series of more specific alternate names in >> >> a .desktop file, with more levels than the current GenericName and Name. >> > >> > I think the KDE system settings desktop file just needs an addition of: >> > >> > OnlyShowIn=KDE; >> > >> > Richard. >> > >> >> It has already been explained why this is not sufficient. System >> settings is needed to configure many aspects of KDE programs. Doing >> this will leave Gnome users unable to configure any KDE programs they >> use. > > I already pointed out a solution that makes it "System Settings" in KDE > and "KDE System Settings" in other desktops. The KDE developers seemed > to agree to this. The problem is solved. Please let's end this thread > and get back to writing great free software. > > Thanks, > Shaun > > > > desktop-spec-update2 Description: Binary data
