Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
Brian wrote: In those cases, obviously Mandrake will want to fill in the gap. Most of the folks not using KDE or Gnome probably don't need config tools, but if they do, perhaps Webmin would be a good choice, since it's environment-neutral. It's starting to get confusing because KDE 3.1 (beta 2) is developing general (non-KDE-specific) control centre options; as well as Linux kernel configuration/linuxconf, already in 3.0, there is a new 3.1 control centre option to play around with the X configuration and another to install fonts. Needless to say, these overlap with Mandrake Control Centre options and, in the case of the KDE X configurator, appear to be dangerous to the configuration set up by drakconf :/ The way things are going the only solution to this confusion will be for some sort of open control centre architecture whereby a reseller (Mandrake, SuSE, Red Hat et alia) can plug modules of their own into the core framework and even remove KDE's/Gnome's own, replacing them with their equivalents ... Alastair This email has been scanned for all viruses by the MessageLabs SkyScan service. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit http://www.messagelabs.com
Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
Le Lundi 11 Novembre 2002 05:06, Brian Smith a écrit : On Sunday 10 November 2002 03:20 am, Florent BERANGER wrote: I agree that the Mandrake config tools ought to be integrated into the KDE or Gnome control centers. What would be super-nice icing-on-the-cake kind of stuff would be if they'd do a Qt front-end to the tools so they blend with the KDE control center better. Gtk library is lighter than qt and, works in all environments, and all Mdk's tools are already in Perl-Gtk, I agree with Mdk to keep Gtk ! Gtk apps can be embeded in KDE control center, there is no matter. Gtk might be lighter than Qt, but if a user has no Gtk-based software, config tools in Gtk are going to be more load for that user than if they were Qt. The flip side of that is also true though, which is why having both options would be ideal. Given limited developer resources though, it would seem logical to me to design for the toolkit of the default desktop. Many major softwares (as Gimp) are in Gtk. Your case (no gtk apps) is too specific. Please don't apply your case to all users. If a user want a minimal system with X or a system with Gnome, windowmaker, flubox, E, do you think he want qt libraries ? I think no. 2 frontends to develop and maintain ? I don't think Mdk team will have the time and it's just a little design issue in config tool. I don't think that is important at this time. As far as embedding the Gtk apps in KDE control center, it's cool that you can do it, but how is it going to look? Fonctionnalities : top Ease of use : top Coherence : top Look : so so but it's not the more important for config tool. And it'll not look so bad. And, if they do that, you'll can navigate in control center (both kde gnome) without a mouse, a feature that MCC don't have at this time. I was not aware of that. Do people actually use KDE and Gnome without a mouse, though? And if user just have misconfigured his mouse ? And if kde have tool in is control center that gnome one haven't ? And for others environments ? In those cases, obviously Mandrake will want to fill in the gap. Most of the folks not using KDE or Gnome probably don't need config tools, but if they do, perhaps Webmin would be a good choice, since it's environment-neutral. They don't want config tools ??? I don't think they'll be agree. They'll consider that as a regression ! I want MCC on my fluxbox desktop ! Which ones ? I don't see. Take the exemple of Drakxres who works better and have many more fonctionnalities than kxconfig. To each his own, I guess. I think kxconfig is just fine, and I don't see any major missing functionality in it. Because Xdrakres have a better ease of use, use Mdk hardware detection libraries / have a better Mdk stuff integration. And I just saw that kxconfig have a bug - he detect my keyboard with US layout. I'm in french layout (I agree, it's not related). Oh, while we're on the topic, I'll state my opinion that linuxconf was the biggest piece of crap I have ever tried to use to configure a system, and I Hmm, I take it by your lack of argument here that you're not a linuxconf fan either? :) MCC is greet for others environment than Gnome KDE. If Mdk team is agree, tests can be done (it's not long/hard to integrate Mdk tools in KDE control center. For Gnome control center, I don't know, I hope it's the same).
Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002 12:30:35 +0100 Florent BERANGER [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Many major softwares (as Gimp) are in Gtk. Your case (no gtk apps) is too specific. Please don't apply your case to all users. I'm sure the subset of users who rarely if ever run a Gtk app is not very small. Even if they do have some Gtk apps installed, they're likely not running them all the time. They are in KDE all the time. So Gtk config tools will have more impact on their systems than Qt tools. Actually, it doesn't matter much to me, I have 1600MHz and half a gig of RAM. It's the visual integration that concerns me more. If a user want a minimal system with X or a system with Gnome, windowmaker, flubox, E, do you think he want qt libraries ? I think no. Of course not, which is why I suggested that the ideal thing would be to have both options. 2 frontends to develop and maintain ? I don't think Mdk team will have the time and it's just a little design issue in config tool. I don't think that is important at this time. If you don't try to duplicate functionality that KDE puts in their control center, you wouldn't have that many Qt tools to write. In fact, I'm not sure you have to write any - as of KDE 3.1, there's a pretty comprehensive set of tools available. You may disagree, even to the point of thinking the KDE tools are crap, but I'd appreciate if you would leave them in there for the users who like them. Choice is always better than no choice. And look on the bright side - at least no one is asking for Motif versions of the config tools! ;) Most of the folks not using KDE or Gnome probably don't need config tools, but if they do, perhaps Webmin would be a good choice, since it's environment-neutral. They don't want config tools ??? I don't think they'll be agree. They'll consider that as a regression ! Most of the people I know of who use WindowMaker, Fluxbox, and the like prefer to edit their config files by hand. Because Xdrakres have a better ease of use, use Mdk hardware detection libraries / have a better Mdk stuff integration. And I just saw that kxconfig have a bug - he detect my keyboard with US layout. I'm in french layout (I agree, it's not related). Better ease of use? I don't agree. I think Kxconfig is more straightforward. But I realize that's just a matter of opinion. Better Mdk integration? OK, but if I don't use the Mdk tools that much, why should that matter to me? I think I saw the same bug in Kxconfig - it thought I had some layout besides US. But before the Mdk guys get big heads, I'll point out that MCC's printer config doesn't work on my system - it just sits there at please wait with the icon pulsating. MCC is greet for others environment than Gnome KDE. If Mdk team is agree, tests can be done (it's not long/hard to integrate Mdk tools in KDE control center. For Gnome control center, I don't know, I hope it's the same). I'll just ask, if at all possible, that if that's the approach Mandrake takes, they do something similar to what Menudrake does, and have an option to turn off the Mandrake tools and use the KDE ones, at least in the cases where there is a KDE tool. As I said before, choice is good! -- Brian Smith
Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
Selon Brian Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Saturday 09 November 2002 05:13 pm, J.A. Magallón wrote: On 2002.11.09 Gary Greene wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [...] as it does now. If you want only one control center, just embed your tools into the KDE Control Center (+the seperate one for GNOME users.) That's what I most would like. MDK can develop its own tools, but plz integrate them in standard control centers, like Gnome's one. Most people uses KDE or Gnome. For those not using any of them, sure there is one other config tool widely used (linuxconf ?). So you can get your useful tools and integrate them in the standard control panels. One backend and several fronts to embed them in control panels. I agree that the Mandrake config tools ought to be integrated into the KDE or Gnome control centers. What would be super-nice icing-on-the-cake kind of stuff would be if they'd do a Qt front-end to the tools so they blend with the KDE control center better. Gtk library is lighter than qt and, works in all environments, and all Mdk's tools are already in Perl-Gtk, I agree with Mdk to keep Gtk ! Gtk apps can be embeded in KDE control center, there is no matter. And, if they do that, you'll can navigate in control center (both kde gnome) without a mouse, a feature that MCC don't have at this time. Also, I'd say if both KDE and Gnome put a config tool into their control centers, Mandrake should count that as a blessing - it's one less config tool you guys have to develop! And if kde have tool in is control center that gnome one haven't ? And for others environments ? I definitely don't want to see anything the KDE folks create taken out of the KDE control center. They put a lot of work into their tools also, and some of them I like better than the MCC alternative. Which ones ? I don't see. Take the exemple of Drakxres who works better and have many more fonctionnalities than kxconfig. Oh, while we're on the topic, I'll state my opinion that linuxconf was the biggest piece of crap I have ever tried to use to configure a system, and I am so glad to see it disappearing from distributions. Folks who aren't using KDE or Gnome would be better off with the current MCC, or even with Webmin. -- Brian Smith
Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
On Sunday 10 November 2002 03:20 am, Florent BERANGER wrote: I agree that the Mandrake config tools ought to be integrated into the KDE or Gnome control centers. What would be super-nice icing-on-the-cake kind of stuff would be if they'd do a Qt front-end to the tools so they blend with the KDE control center better. Gtk library is lighter than qt and, works in all environments, and all Mdk's tools are already in Perl-Gtk, I agree with Mdk to keep Gtk ! Gtk apps can be embeded in KDE control center, there is no matter. Gtk might be lighter than Qt, but if a user has no Gtk-based software, config tools in Gtk are going to be more load for that user than if they were Qt. The flip side of that is also true though, which is why having both options would be ideal. Given limited developer resources though, it would seem logical to me to design for the toolkit of the default desktop. As far as embedding the Gtk apps in KDE control center, it's cool that you can do it, but how is it going to look? And, if they do that, you'll can navigate in control center (both kde gnome) without a mouse, a feature that MCC don't have at this time. I was not aware of that. Do people actually use KDE and Gnome without a mouse, though? And if kde have tool in is control center that gnome one haven't ? And for others environments ? In those cases, obviously Mandrake will want to fill in the gap. Most of the folks not using KDE or Gnome probably don't need config tools, but if they do, perhaps Webmin would be a good choice, since it's environment-neutral. Which ones ? I don't see. Take the exemple of Drakxres who works better and have many more fonctionnalities than kxconfig. To each his own, I guess. I think kxconfig is just fine, and I don't see any major missing functionality in it. Oh, while we're on the topic, I'll state my opinion that linuxconf was the biggest piece of crap I have ever tried to use to configure a system, and I Hmm, I take it by your lack of argument here that you're not a linuxconf fan either? :) -- Brian Smith
[Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
KDE control center have more and more fonctionnalities each days (X configuration with kxconfig, lilo configuration, camera configuration, keyboard layout, power control, hardware infos, network config,...). A day, we'll have 2 control centers in KDE environment, not 100% interoperables/compatibles (they will not configure thinks as same). kxconfig doesn't configure display as drakXres for exemple. It's a little bad for usability to have 2 controls center (confusions,...) What can be do (now or in future) : - lets things as this, it works mostly, it's not top for usability but it's not bad / 2 or more control centers, that's greet, the user will choose he's prefered one in his prefered environment. - delete tools as kxconfig in KDEcontrolcenter- KDE control center configure only KDE things. MCC control center will configure all others things. - modify tools for entire compatibility/interoperability (if they don't)- good luck ;). - replace tools as kxconfig, lilo config in kde control center by Mdk's one - Mdk's tools integration in KDE control center. MCC'll be keept (if user is in another environment or if he want to use it because he prefer it)- the configuration center icon in launch bar launch KDE control center in kde (kdecontrol center will be the default control center in kde), MCC in another desktop environment. It's my prefered issue (I like MCC but it could be better for usability- all configuration in the same control center in KDE, the top for usability and it's always the same tools who are used in each environments (Mdk's ones)). Thanks to have read all ;) Florent
Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday 09 November 2002 02:40 pm, Florent BERANGER wrote: KDE control center have more and more fonctionnalities each days (X configuration with kxconfig, lilo configuration, camera configuration, keyboard layout, power control, hardware infos, network config,...). A day, we'll have 2 control centers in KDE environment, not 100% interoperables/compatibles (they will not configure thinks as same). kxconfig doesn't configure display as drakXres for exemple. It's a little bad for usability to have 2 controls center (confusions,...) What can be do (now or in future) : - lets things as this, it works mostly, it's not top for usability but it's not bad / 2 or more control centers, that's greet, the user will choose he's prefered one in his prefered environment. - delete tools as kxconfig in KDEcontrolcenter- KDE control center configure only KDE things. MCC control center will configure all others things. - modify tools for entire compatibility/interoperability (if they don't)- good luck ;). - replace tools as kxconfig, lilo config in kde control center by Mdk's one - Mdk's tools integration in KDE control center. MCC'll be keept (if user is in another environment or if he want to use it because he prefer it)- the configuration center icon in launch bar launch KDE control center in kde (kdecontrol center will be the default control center in kde), MCC in another desktop environment. It's my prefered issue (I like MCC but it could be better for usability- all configuration in the same control center in KDE, the top for usability and it's always the same tools who are used in each environments (Mdk's ones)). Thanks to have read all ;) Florent The second you start ripping things out of the KDE Control Center, just because the tools are identical to yours is the day I pack up and leave MDK behind. This is exactly what Red Hat did and it didn't win them many friends by doing so. I like the fact that KDE has as much power and configurability as it does now. If you want only one control center, just embed your tools into the KDE Control Center (+the seperate one for GNOME users.) - -- Gary Greene Sent from seele.gvsu.edu 15:30:36 up 1 day, 5:44, 3 users, load average: 0.36, 0.83, 0.87 = Founder and president of GVLUG. Chairman and Project Lead of the E-media Committee of AltReal. PHONE : 331-0562 EMAIL : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] = -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE9zXGQVg8c0/GZcW8RAvr9AJ4rnHTdrepvMwaZyKkHF8F/o4wxjACeLkcQ iOuahPJ8IwvbhJ3OFRrQanU= =UnGn -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
On Saturday 09 November 2002 21:40, Florent BERANGER wrote: KDE control center have more and more fonctionnalities each days (X configuration with kxconfig, lilo configuration, camera configuration, keyboard layout, power control, hardware infos, network config,...). A day, we'll have 2 control centers in KDE environment, not 100% interoperables/compatibles (they will not configure thinks as same). kxconfig doesn't configure display as drakXres for exemple. It's a little bad for usability to have 2 controls center (confusions,...) It's not bad to have even 4 control centers, as long as they are fully interoperable - i.e all of them use the same files to keep configuration in etc. The problem is that they aren't interoperable. What can be do (now or in future) : - lets things as this, it works mostly, it's not top for usability but it's not bad / 2 or more control centers, that's greet, the user will choose he's prefered one in his prefered environment. - delete tools as kxconfig in KDEcontrolcenter- KDE control center configure only KDE things. MCC control center will configure all others things. Is keyboard layout editor KDE specific thing or not? And KDM configuration module? - modify tools for entire compatibility/interoperability (if they don't)- good luck ;). It's the right way, IMHO. - replace tools as kxconfig, lilo config in kde control center by Mdk's one - Mdk's tools integration in KDE control center. MCC'll be keept (if user is in another environment or if he want to use it because he prefer it)- the configuration center icon in launch bar launch KDE control center in kde (kdecontrol center will be the default control center in kde), MCC in another desktop environment. It's my prefered issue (I like MCC but it could be better for usability- all configuration in the same control center in KDE, the top for usability and it's always the same tools who are used in each environments (Mdk's ones)). MDK has explicitly declared that drak* are GUI-agnostic and are not supposed to integrate neither into KDE Control Center nor into Gnome Control Center nor into any other environment-specific control center. IMHO, it's a very big mistake and they should integrate. Thanks to have read all ;) Florent -- Regards, Alex Chudnovsky e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ : 35559910
Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
On 2002.11.09 Gary Greene wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [...] as it does now. If you want only one control center, just embed your tools into the KDE Control Center (+the seperate one for GNOME users.) That's what I most would like. MDK can develop its own tools, but plz integrate them in standard control centers, like Gnome's one. Most people uses KDE or Gnome. For those not using any of them, sure there is one other config tool widely used (linuxconf ?). So you can get your useful tools and integrate them in the standard control panels. One backend and several fronts to embed them in control panels. -- J.A. Magallon [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ Software is like sex: werewolf.able.es \ It's better when it's free Mandrake Linux release 9.1 (Cooker) for i586 Linux 2.4.20-rc1-jam2 (gcc 3.2 (Mandrake Linux 9.1 3.2-3mdk))
Re: [Cooker] [not urgent] - controls centers reflexion
On Saturday 09 November 2002 05:13 pm, J.A. Magallón wrote: On 2002.11.09 Gary Greene wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 [...] as it does now. If you want only one control center, just embed your tools into the KDE Control Center (+the seperate one for GNOME users.) That's what I most would like. MDK can develop its own tools, but plz integrate them in standard control centers, like Gnome's one. Most people uses KDE or Gnome. For those not using any of them, sure there is one other config tool widely used (linuxconf ?). So you can get your useful tools and integrate them in the standard control panels. One backend and several fronts to embed them in control panels. I agree that the Mandrake config tools ought to be integrated into the KDE or Gnome control centers. What would be super-nice icing-on-the-cake kind of stuff would be if they'd do a Qt front-end to the tools so they blend with the KDE control center better. Also, I'd say if both KDE and Gnome put a config tool into their control centers, Mandrake should count that as a blessing - it's one less config tool you guys have to develop! I definitely don't want to see anything the KDE folks create taken out of the KDE control center. They put a lot of work into their tools also, and some of them I like better than the MCC alternative. Oh, while we're on the topic, I'll state my opinion that linuxconf was the biggest piece of crap I have ever tried to use to configure a system, and I am so glad to see it disappearing from distributions. Folks who aren't using KDE or Gnome would be better off with the current MCC, or even with Webmin. -- Brian Smith
