subject:"Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop"

On 12 August 2014 01:03, Kees de Jong  wrote:

> Are we really comparing RAM here as if it were the 90's?
>
I had stated previously XFCE had started showing memory usage similar to
gnome. This has quite obviously changed. I was wrong, and i'm posting it as
a correction to my statement.

I also just test installed all 4 DE's and am happy to run any further tests
required to reach a consensus.


> How many people here use Android? Today it needs 512 MB to function
> properly.
>
Linux+Java. Needs memory, surprise?


> In two years that could be 1 or 2 GB and that's a mobile OS.
>
It's Linux. It has a web browser. A modem. A wireless connection.
Bluetooth. GPS. Music Player, Photo viewer, wait this is sounding familiar.


> How much RAM does your browser use?
>
Lots, which is why i prefer my DE not to eat it all.

My Chrome/Firefox easily uses 1 GB
>
My GNOME 3.10 desktop (running Fedora now because I needed a modern GNOME
> version for Exchange support for work) is using about 800 MB to 1200 MB.
>
Ouch

Do I really care? No, because RAM is cheap and I have 8 GB. Do I need to
> buy more? No, because 8 GB is still more than enough.
>
free
totalused free
 sharedbuffers cached
Mem:12332856 12164516168340 129196
1002483989512
-/+ buffers/cache:8074756  4258100
Swap:3211260  129088  3082172
Maybe for you. (and my DE uses less than lxde and xfce, but with more
options and jazz+bugs). But that's me, i might be able to fit my own
memory, most people will not, they have to pay for that, and most would
have to remove memory to fit  more memory, hence making the cost more than
you imagined.

>
> If you can't run GNOME because you don't have the system specs to run a
> modern desktop then you can select XFCE/LXDE in the installation menu. But
> let's be fair, those people are a minority. And a default should fit the
> needs of the majority.
>
Ahh good you have statistics for that. Please link them, or quote and cite
sources.

>
> And since people easily have 4 GB of RAM or more these days with the basic
> 3D acceleration (even a Raspberry Pi can run GNOME 3) then I would say that
> logic chooses GNOME.
>
Some people like the 'basic 3d acceleration' for other things, so not only
do you want me to sacrifice my RAM to all powerful DE, but also my GPU? How
kind of you ;) . Also as the memory usage shows, a pi won't be doing much
more than starting gnome and going, oh look it's gnome.

> Also because of a ton of other reasons already mentioned e.g. systemd,
> documentation, dedicated maintainers, accessibility, etc.
>
OK that's a gnome+1 then. :)
TBH i'd rather hear what you like about gnome3, the workflow or anything
else that makes it 'stand out' from other DE's, or rather, worth a large
percentage of ram, especially if can surpass 1GB.
Thanks for the info.

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Kees de Jong

Are we really comparing RAM here as if it were the 90's? How many people
here use Android? Today it needs 512 MB to function properly. In two years
that could be 1 or 2 GB and that's a mobile OS. How much RAM does your
browser use? My Chrome/Firefox easily uses 1 GB. My GNOME 3.10 desktop
(running Fedora now because I needed a modern GNOME version for Exchange
support for work) is using about 800 MB to 1200 MB. Do I really care? No,
because RAM is cheap and I have 8 GB. Do I need to buy more? No, because 8
GB is still more than enough.

If you can't run GNOME because you don't have the system specs to run a
modern desktop then you can select XFCE/LXDE in the installation menu. But
let's be fair, those people are a minority. And a default should fit the
needs of the majority. And since people easily have 4 GB of RAM or more
these days with the basic 3D acceleration (even a Raspberry Pi can run
GNOME 3) then I would say that logic chooses GNOME. Also because of a ton
of other reasons already mentioned e.g. systemd, documentation, dedicated
maintainers, accessibility, etc.

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

XFCE:

 total   used   free sharedbuffers cached
Mem:506756 362468 144288   6568  22756 179264
-/+ buffers/cache: 160448 346308
Swap:   392188  0 392188


GNOME:

 total   used   free sharedbuffers cached
Mem:506756 500360   6396   1948840  37724
-/+ buffers/cache: 461796  44960
Swap:   392188  66672 325516


LXDE:

 total   used   free sharedbuffers cached
Mem:506756 316504 190252   8500  18920 149812
-/+ buffers/cache: 147772 358984
Swap:   392188  0 392188


KDE:

 total   used   free sharedbuffers cached
Mem:506756 499724   7032   6772  10516 109760
-/+ buffers/cache: 379448 127308
Swap:   392188  21632 370556


As default using the latest mini.iso with  mirror/udeb/suite=sid and using
the 'alternate desktop menu'
booted, logged in, loaded a terminal, here you go. notice the swap usage.
virtualbox vm 512MB

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Olav Vitters

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 09:05:35PM +0200, Werner Baumann wrote:
> It looks like this discussion gets somehow heated as could be expected.
> 
> My opinion is that it is impossible to decide which DE Debian should
> suggest to its users. Because it highly depends on personal preferences;
> what features are expected and, just as well, what much hated features
> must not be present at all; how the user uses the computer and what the
> user is familiar with.

That's like not wanting to make a decision? As a consequence every
desktop in that selection box MUST be fully QA tested (so release
stopper bugs, etc) and supported long term.

Mageia does this for example (offer choice + tests those choices), but
only offers KDE/GNOME in that choice. Rest can still be chosen, but is
not fully QA tested so they're a bit more hidden.

-- 
Regards,
Olav

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811204343.gd22...@bkor.dhs.org

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread David Weinehall

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 01:47:53PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 07:42:41PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> > Available in GNOME 3.
> > 
> > Available in GNOME 3.
> > 
> > Not enabled by default (if I remember correctly), but possible to enable
> > using gnome-tweak-tool.
> 
> I shouldn't have to know that.  And I am pretty sure when gnome3 appeared
> in sid, it wasn't available.
> 
> > Not enabled by default (if I remember correctly), but possible to enable
> > using gnome-tweak-tool.
> 
> I will somewhat agree that one is hardly ever used since I just alt+tab to 
> the other window I want.
> 
> > Available in GNOME 3.
> > 
> > Alt+space brings up the window menu in GNOME 3.
> > 
> > So, sounds like GNOME 3 provides/can provide everything you seem to
> > expect from a window manager.
> 
> Trying to navigate the horrible menu system trying to find where to
> configure things was highly unpleasant too.  It made windows 8 seem sane.
> 
> I just believe the default when you install and log in the first time
> shoudl be something that makes sense to your typical average user, and I
> don't think gnome3 by default does that.  It can be tweaked to do so now
> (I don't think it could initially), but the typical user won't know how
> to do that.  The defaults are bad.

Well, if there's a consensus that the minimise/maximise
buttons are needed (I always enable them, so I'd vote yes!), then
I'm sure that the Debian GNOME team will be happy to enable those
options by default.


Regards: David
-- 
 /) David Weinehall  /) Rime on my window   (\
//  ~   //  Diamond-white roses of fire //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/(/   Beautiful hoar-frost   (/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811200924.gf2...@hirohito.acc.umu.se

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Werner Baumann

It looks like this discussion gets somehow heated as could be expected.

My opinion is that it is impossible to decide which DE Debian should
suggest to its users. Because it highly depends on personal preferences;
what features are expected and, just as well, what much hated features
must not be present at all; how the user uses the computer and what the
user is familiar with.

My wish is to make this a user decision and to make this decision as
easy to the user as possible. Like Joel Rees I *believe* to remember
that I was once quite surprised when I choose the easy installation and
then could not choose my preferred DE. Whatever installation method a
user chooses, when the user chooses to include a DE then the user
should be asked which one. That's what I wish from the installer. (Of
course short, "neutral" descriptions would be fine, hints depending on
the hardware found by the installer would be fine too. But that depends
on whether somebody has time and interest to do the work.) This would
also include a default that is chosen when the user ignores the
question. I have no preference on that default.

This approach would fit the Debian philosophy and would work with
net-install as well as complete DVD/CD-sets.

This question of the default DE should be separated from the question
of space limited install media. To have different images for different
DE's would be fine but would probably put too much burden on the team
that creates the images. XFCE or a stripped down version of Gnome
should both be ok for that case.

Cheers
Werner


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811210535.74d26...@ginster.fritz.box

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Andrei POPESCU

On Lu, 11 aug 14, 19:38:47, David Weinehall wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:00:05PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > I do: I see a reason to netinst a 0.629xCD size desktop install rather 
> > than a 0.829xCD size desktop when bandwidth is costly.
> 
> Yes, but if you netinst you can *pick* your desktop, it's not like you
> have to pick the default.  Do a minimal install, then use tasksel
> to select XFCE (or just x + a window manager + the application you
> actually need).

Even the netinst has a default. Besides your method below it's also 
possible to change it using the boot menu, which many will miss or be 
afraid to try (it's under "Advanced options"), so will end up with 
whatever Debian chooses as default.

So the default matters also for the netinst, unless it's made easier to 
change from the installation process itself.

Probably easiest would be to just get rid of "Mail server", "Web 
server", "Print server" (CUPS will get pulled anyway as dependency of 
most if not all major DEs), etc. and instead display a list of Desktop 
Environments to choose from.

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
http://wiki.debian.org/FAQsFromDebianUser
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic
http://nuvreauspam.ro/gpg-transition.txt

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

How do you measure memory? Free?
Could you quite possibly post the output of free and whatever else you
measure with? (the full output)
For reference against jessie, i'm installing an up to date jessie right
now...

Thanks
Anthony (bofh80)

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Lennart Sorensen

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 07:42:41PM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> Available in GNOME 3.
> 
> Available in GNOME 3.
> 
> Not enabled by default (if I remember correctly), but possible to enable
> using gnome-tweak-tool.

I shouldn't have to know that.  And I am pretty sure when gnome3 appeared
in sid, it wasn't available.

> Not enabled by default (if I remember correctly), but possible to enable
> using gnome-tweak-tool.

I will somewhat agree that one is hardly ever used since I just alt+tab to the 
other window I want.

> Available in GNOME 3.
> 
> Alt+space brings up the window menu in GNOME 3.
> 
> So, sounds like GNOME 3 provides/can provide everything you seem to
> expect from a window manager.

Trying to navigate the horrible menu system trying to find where to
configure things was highly unpleasant too.  It made windows 8 seem sane.

I just believe the default when you install and log in the first time
shoudl be something that makes sense to your typical average user, and I
don't think gnome3 by default does that.  It can be tweaked to do so now
(I don't think it could initially), but the typical user won't know how
to do that.  The defaults are bad.

-- 
Len Sorensen

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811174753.gx17...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread David Weinehall

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 01:35:28PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> All I personally expect from a window manager is:
> 
> Be able to launch programs (ideally using alt+F2)

Available in GNOME 3.

> Be able to resize the window using the edge of the window

Available in GNOME 3.

> Have a maximize/restore button

Not enabled by default (if I remember correctly), but possible to enable
using gnome-tweak-tool.

> Have a minimize button

Not enabled by default (if I remember correctly), but possible to enable
using gnome-tweak-tool.

> Have a close button

Available in GNOME 3.

> (These last 3 should also show up when I hit alt+space, because well I
> have used that keystroke on many systems for over 20 years to do that).

Alt+space brings up the window menu in GNOME 3.

So, sounds like GNOME 3 provides/can provide everything you seem to
expect from a window manager.

Kind regards, David
-- 
 /) David Weinehall  /) Rime on my window   (\
//  ~   //  Diamond-white roses of fire //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/(/   Beautiful hoar-frost   (/

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811174240.ge2...@hirohito.acc.umu.se

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread David Weinehall

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 06:00:05PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> I do: I see a reason to netinst a 0.629xCD size desktop install rather 
> than a 0.829xCD size desktop when bandwidth is costly.

Yes, but if you netinst you can *pick* your desktop, it's not like you
have to pick the default.  Do a minimal install, then use tasksel
to select XFCE (or just x + a window manager + the application you
actually need).

The CD images are fixed size.  They will fill out a CD-size
(or a DVD, if they are DVD-images).  Netinst images can obviously
be optimized for size, but the netinst images do not contain the
desktop environment, so whichever desktop is default is a totally
moot question in that scenario.

Summary:

* If you download you can pick the smallest option possible;
  thus the default desktop is irrelevant -- people with plenty
  of bandwidth will probably go with the default, but if you know
  that your connectivity is expensive you'll go for something small
  (possibly forgoing the tasks system altogether)

* If you use ready-made CD/DVD images they'll be fixed size no matter
  what.  If you sneaker-net them you definitely want them to be full,
  not half-full.

Regards: David
-- 
 /) David Weinehall  /) Rime on my window   (\
//  ~   //  Diamond-white roses of fire //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/(/   Beautiful hoar-frost   (/

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811173843.gd2...@hirohito.acc.umu.se

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Lennart Sorensen

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 05:34:04PM +0200, Matthias Urlichs wrote:
> You mean left vs. right side? 

Or even showing them at all (certainly last time I bothered to look at
gnome 3 it seemed to think buttons on windows were mostly to be avoided).

> People who are so afraid of new stuff to learn that they won't even figure
> out how to close a window are not Gnome's (or XFCE's, for that matter)
> target audience.
> If you want that, install KDE and tell it to use one of the
> let's-mimic-Windows/MacOS themes.

xfce is perfectly useable to most people by default.

All I personally expect from a window manager is:

Be able to launch programs (ideally using alt+F2)
Be able to resize the window using the edge of the window
Have a maximize/restore button
Have a minimize button
Have a close button
(These last 3 should also show up when I hit alt+space, because well I
have used that keystroke on many systems for over 20 years to do that).

That's it.  I don't need any more than that.  Gnome 3 failed that out
of the box.

It seems Microsoft is willing to accept they fucked up on windwos
8 and are backing down and restoring what people really want in the
next version.  I wonder if the gnome UI designers will ever be willing
to admit they screwed up and back down.

Adding new idea is fine, but not at the expense of existing features
and behaviour.  You have to let people continue to use things until they
get used to the new things if they ever do.  You can't just force people
to switch the way they work.

-- 
Len Sorensen

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811173528.gw17...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Ben Hutchings

On Mon, 2014-08-11 at 03:20 +0100, Anthony F McInerney wrote:
[...]
> If people have old CD only machines i would not like to attempt to get
> kernel 3.16 +drivers +userland working on that. I've been in that
> situation plenty of times, where woody or potato are better simply
> because the drivers had been deprecated. Lets not go into the
> 256/512MB of ram that the CD only computer has and how much gnome or
> xfce is going to chew up and bring the machine to a crawl as soon you
> try to do anything and it hits swap.
[...]

I have a wheezy VM running Xfce comfortably in 256 MB (only a third of
which is used at this moment, excluding caches and buffers).  I doubt
that jessie is going to require vastly more memory.  So I think that
Xfce and CD media are still going to be useful for people who are stuck
with older hardware.

If we agree that it's important to support installation from a single CD
(rather than 2+ CDs or downloads) then Xfce would probably be the right
default DE for that single CD.  I do not support making it the default
in general, though.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Humans are not rational beings; they are rationalising beings.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Joel Rees

2014/08/12 1:12 "Jonas Smedegaard" :
>
> [...]
> Still you are talking about cost in time.  Few I have met in developing
> countries were poor measured in time available.
> [...]

Developed country (Japan). My wife makes me scrimp on everything, so I
still have megabit/sec download. Fiber or 10 Mb/s copper would cost me some
JPY1000 a month more, up to about 3500/mo. (Roughly JPY100 to USD1.00.)
So, when I download DVDs, I plan on leaving the download going all day.

But I don't download DVDs because the installer will go to the net for the
latest anyway, if you let it. Of course, that means upgrading to Jessy is
going to be two days of down time.

--
Joel Rees

Computer memory is just fancy paper,
CPUs just fancy pens.
All is a stream of text
flowing from the past into the future.

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Jonas Smedegaard

Quoting Olav Vitters (2014-08-11 11:21:14)
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> Quite a few places in the World have poor and/or expensive internet 
>> access.  Larger default desktop will hurt the most in developing 
>> countries: non-techies gets discourages to use Debian at all, or when 
>> using it may apply security fixes less often.
>
> How poor is poor?

Poor enough that they bother visitors coming from different places in 
the World asking them to please consider bring install data "by 
sneakernet" (e.g. on CDs but could just as well be floppies or uSD 
storage embedded in iPhones - physical media type not important).

I call it "bother" not because I have experienced actually being 
bothered by such request, but because I have experienced being treated 
like a king in India and Indonesia yet asked that - surprising to me - 
requst.

> I've been participating since having a theoretical 64KB/s cable 
> connection, which in practice only did 3-5KB/s (provider: BART in 
> Rotterdam)! A cd would take about 24 hours to download (net install 
> was sometimes unreliable, so I preferred a cd). Having a poor 
> connection means you get creative. I shared the cd's I downloaded, 
> used rewritable to push the cost down, etc.

How poor was that example of poor?

> I've checked http://explorer.netindex.com/maps which shows the Speed 
> test results across the world. According to that site, the minimal 
> speed I can see in various African countries is at least 0.75 Mbps. 
> Much higher than the speed I was used to.

How expensive is such average speed?  Not measured in dollar, but 
measured in something more locally tangible, like "work hours"?

> Always having a slow connection changes means you're tolerance level 
> is different. I used to download a cd in 24 hours. Nowadays the same 
> takes maybe 35 seconds.

Still you are talking about cost in time.  Few I have met in developing 
countries were poor measured in time available.

> I don't get the doom and gloom unless you're more clear.

Please elaborate what is unclear.

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

signature.asc
Description: signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Jonas Smedegaard

Quoting David Weinehall (2014-08-10 22:59:45)
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>>
>> The issue here really is "how big is it?" rather than "hos many disks 
>> [of which kind] does it fit onto?".
>>
>> "unable to fit on a single image" is not only about use of said 
>> storage devices for installation, but also an indication more 
>> generally of how much data needs to be transfered on average for a 
>> usable installation.
>>
>> Quite a few places in the World have poor and/or expensive internet 
>> access.  Larger default desktop will hurt the most in developing 
>> countries: non-techies gets discourages to use Debian at all, or when 
>> using it may apply security fixes less often.
>
> In all cases where I'm stuck with expensive (and/or slow) Internet I 
> sure as hell pick the netinst image and download the minimum set of 
> packages I need, rather than a whole CD image on the offhand chance 
> that I might need everything on it (which is exceedingly unlikely).

[remark about actual CD use rather than desktop size measure snipped]

> So, as long as GNOME fits on the first installation CD I see no reason 
> not to prefer it over XFCE.

I do: I see a reason to netinst a 0.629xCD size desktop install rather 
than a 0.829xCD size desktop when bandwidth is costly.

(numbers above are made up - just to illustrate that I am talking about 
the size of the desktops, not actual concrete CDs or DVDs or Blueray 
disks.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: signature

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Matthias Urlichs

Hi,

Lennart Sorensen:
> it needs buttons on windows that people expect to see where they expect
> to see them

You mean left vs. right side? 

> Would Debian be willing to make gnome3 have different defaults than
> upstream in the interest of actually being useable to new users who are
> used to other operating systems and desktops?
> 
People who are so afraid of new stuff to learn that they won't even figure
out how to close a window are not Gnome's (or XFCE's, for that matter)
target audience.
If you want that, install KDE and tell it to use one of the
let's-mimic-Windows/MacOS themes.

-- 
-- Matthias Urlichs


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811153404.gk15...@smurf.noris.de

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Lennart Sorensen

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 11:15:15AM +0200, Thomas Weber wrote:
> Not sure why you'd want to go for third world countries, but let's look
> at Germany (Aldi is one of the two biggest discounters here):
> http://www.presseportal.de/pm/112096/2653870/aldi-senkt-preise-fuer-fischprodukte-oel-und-smoothies
> CD-R Rohlinge (80 Minuten, je 50er Spindel) 5,99 Euro
> DVD+R Rohlinge (je 20er Spindel)3,99 Euro 
> That is 0.12 EUR per CDR and 0.20 EUR per DVD. 

My local computer store has $8.99 for 50 DVD-R and $16.99 for 50 CD-R.

Of course they also have 100 CD-R for $18.88 and 100 DVD-R for $24.88,
so who knows.  Seems the price is pretty similar depending what you buy
and how many.

Of course as for gnome as a default, unless it can have sane defaults
where it behaves as the vast majority of computer users are used to a
desktop working, then I don't think it is a usable desktop.  That means
it needs buttons on windows that people expect to see where they expect
to see them, and things behaving as they expect them to behave.
Would Debian be willing to make gnome3 have different defaults than
upstream in the interest of actually being useable to new users who are
used to other operating systems and desktops?

-- 
Len Sorensen

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811144154.gu17...@csclub.uwaterloo.ca

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread shirish शिरीष

at bottom :-

On 8/11/14, Thomas Weber  wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 03:20:49AM +0100, Anthony F McInerney wrote:
>> Would the people who are claiming that blank cdr are cheaper than dvdr,
>> especially in third world countries, please cite sources (shops, price
>> checkers etc) of the price of say 5 pack or 10 pack, even up to 50pack of
>> CD's, vs the same amount of DVD's, from those third world countries. Is
>> the
>> price of a small pack of DVD's really worth making the decision on a DE
>> for
>> debian?
>
> Not sure why you'd want to go for third world countries, but let's look
> at Germany (Aldi is one of the two biggest discounters here):
> http://www.presseportal.de/pm/112096/2653870/aldi-senkt-preise-fuer-fischprodukte-oel-und-smoothies
> CD-R Rohlinge (80 Minuten, je 50er Spindel) 5,99 Euro
> DVD+R Rohlinge (je 20er Spindel)3,99 Euro
> That is 0.12 EUR per CDR and 0.20 EUR per DVD.
>
>> DVD readers/writers are cheaper now than CD readers/writers ever were.
> I don't think it makes sense to ask for the price of one media (which is
> in Cents), but then assume that the extra cost for a new DVD reader is
> negligible.
>
>   Thomas

Hi all,
As an interested user I come from India and at least here there isn't
a difference at all in terms of a CD or DVD media. A single of both
costs Rs. 20/- (with the plastic case and all) and going to some of
the wholesalers we can get it for Rs. 7/- or Rs. 8/-  (in a spindle or
a box) . The price might differ between the two by a Rupee or two
(it's been quite some time since I went to buy blank DVD's) but the
space equation is such that I never buy a CD.

I do remember a distinct conversation where I asked him if he ever got
orders for CD with the vendor replying that mostly he gets order CD's
from villages rather than from city/town itself. Still the ratio was
80 > 20 in favor of DVD's.

I know it's not at all scientific and is probably a strawman argument
but that's the way I see it here. Almost nobody I know within my
circle talks about CD and I do not just work with the elite in the
city.
-- 
  Regards,
  Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
  My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/cadddzrny5y33zbc+majhavcdckup9jrdmwadvaaufg7d-zd...@mail.gmail.com

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

On Mon, 11 Aug, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Thomas Weber
wrote:

Not sure why you'd want to go for third world countries, but let's
look

at Germany (Aldi is one of the two biggest discounters here):
http://www.presseportal.de/pm/112096/2653870/aldi-senkt-preise-fuer-fischprodukte-oel-und-smoothies
CD-R Rohlinge (80 Minuten, je 50er Spindel) 5,99 Euro
DVD+R Rohlinge (je 20er Spindel)3,99 Euro
That is 0.12 EUR per CDR and 0.20 EUR per DVD.
As you have shown here, it would cost an extra €0.08 to have it on
DVD instead of CD.

Also I’ll note for you, that's 86GB for €3.99 or 40GB for €5.99
The cost of a DVD is not some far reaching astronomical price increase,
in fact per GB it's cheaper.
Here in the UK I can walk into a poundstore and pick up 4 dvds for a
£1. I'm quite sure you can do the same in any $1 dollar, 99cent store.
The cd's in that store come in a 5pack for £1.

DVD readers/writers are cheaper now than CD readers/writers ever
were.
I don't think it makes sense to ask for the price of one media (which
is

in Cents), but then assume that the extra cost for a new DVD reader is
negligible.

Price is not a valid concern for DVD, in terms of media or drives.
Either the CD drive is too old to function or the machine is. (in terms
of jessie anyway), you can barely buy second hand CD drives, but DVD
drives are a plenty, sure you can buy them NEW for little more than a
pack of 50 CD's.

And if it's "machines in the wild with CD drives still" again, we have
woody, squeeze and wheezy for them.

I ran woody on my cheap laptop in 2002. it had a DVD drive.

Can we now move on to choosing a DE?

Thanks
Anthony.

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-11 Thread Thomas Weber

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 03:20:49AM +0100, Anthony F McInerney wrote:
> Would the people who are claiming that blank cdr are cheaper than dvdr,
> especially in third world countries, please cite sources (shops, price
> checkers etc) of the price of say 5 pack or 10 pack, even up to 50pack of
> CD's, vs the same amount of DVD's, from those third world countries. Is the
> price of a small pack of DVD's really worth making the decision on a DE for
> debian?

Not sure why you'd want to go for third world countries, but let's look
at Germany (Aldi is one of the two biggest discounters here):
http://www.presseportal.de/pm/112096/2653870/aldi-senkt-preise-fuer-fischprodukte-oel-und-smoothies
CD-R Rohlinge (80 Minuten, je 50er Spindel) 5,99 Euro
DVD+R Rohlinge (je 20er Spindel)3,99 Euro 
That is 0.12 EUR per CDR and 0.20 EUR per DVD. 

> DVD readers/writers are cheaper now than CD readers/writers ever were.
I don't think it makes sense to ask for the price of one media (which is
in Cents), but then assume that the extra cost for a new DVD reader is
negligible.

Thomas


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140811091514.GA5055@t61

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-10 Thread Anthony F McInerney

Would the people who are claiming that blank cdr are cheaper than dvdr,
especially in third world countries, please cite sources (shops, price
checkers etc) of the price of say 5 pack or 10 pack, even up to 50pack of
CD's, vs the same amount of DVD's, from those third world countries. Is the
price of a small pack of DVD's really worth making the decision on a DE for
debian?

If people have old CD only machines i would not like to attempt to get
kernel 3.16 +drivers +userland working on that. I've been in that situation
plenty of times, where woody or potato are better simply because the
drivers had been deprecated. Lets not go into the 256/512MB of ram that the
CD only computer has and how much gnome or xfce is going to chew up and
bring the machine to a crawl as soon you try to do anything and it hits
swap.

DVD readers/writers are cheaper now than CD readers/writers ever were.
The only argument you have left is bandwidth, and fortunately DVD's can be
sent in the post. Also we are probably only talking about a 100MB or 200MB
more.

I'd rather a nice debian installer with everything included, rather than
trying to 'cut stuff out' just so it 'fits'. There's simply no need for
that.

The real issue at hand should not be derailed by "does it work with 1995
technology"

As for the topic, the assumption of "let's switch back to gnome now", how
quaint.

Firstly, it should be "Let's choose the default DE for Jessie".

Secondly, why haven't the lxde and kde developers been included on the list
for this discussion?
Even with the init choice, the outsiders were given a chance to speak up
(E17 anyone?)

Thirdly, and more importantly the state of gnome itself in testing/jessie
repositories, let alone sid, even with a larger team, the mismatched
package versions, the first movement from 3.8 to 3.12, means it's barely
been looked at let alone tested, those that do attempt to test it come into
irc regular to complain about it.

So can we not have our DE chosen on the merit of 20 cents, and instead
decide which DE is best for technical reasons, usability, accessibility or
interface and start customising it pronto? (ie, still need to decide on a
default theme)

For reference i do not use XFCE or GNOME as my default DE, i have attempted
to use sid and testing in a vm to test gnome3 recently and just gave up,
that obviously might have changed in the last few weeks.

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-10 Thread The Wanderer

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 08/10/2014 02:39 PM, Kees de Jong wrote:

> Why are we discussing CD/DVD sizes? Why not just use an USB
> netinstall? It's then possible to download and install the stuff you
> need, if you don't want to use a lot of bandwidth then choose no
> desktop environment or XFCE/LXDE. But if you can spare some more time
> then you can install GNOME/KDE. Seems like a good deal. And USB
> sticks are cheaper (also easier to reuse) so I don't get the 'hurting
> developing countries' argument.

With netinst, you incur the bandwidth cost at install time, once for
every install.

With a larger install image which includes all the packages needed for a
more comprehensive install (whether CD, DVD or otherwise), you incur the
bandwidth cost up once front, and then never again (until it's time to
update to a new install-image version anyway).

If you're only going to do one install, then yes, the netinst image
probably makes more sense for a bandwidth-limited environment.

But if you're going to do multiple installs, using one of the larger and
more comprehensive prebuilt install images almost certainly makes more
sense than using netinst.

- --
   The Wanderer

Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.

A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=/d+b
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53e80854.8030...@fastmail.fm

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Joel Rees  wrote:

(Having booted up a real OS, but still using Google's webmail fake MUA. heh.)

> [...]
> 2014/08/11 7:32 "Joel Rees" :
>> 2014/08/08 6:58 "Jordi Mallach" :
>>
>> [...]
>> > systemd embracing: One of the reasons to switch to Xfce was that it
>> > didn’t
>> > depend on systemd. But now that systemd is the default, that shouldn’t
>> > be a
>> > problem. Also given ConsoleKit is deprecated and dead upstream, KDE and
>> > Xfce
>> > are switching or are planning to switch to systemd/logind.
>
> Isn't this essentially the sum of your thesis

That is, isn't this your thesis, in sum?

>> > In addition to this, moving to Xfce now would mean yet another
>> > transition to
>> > a new desktop (if we consider GNOME 2.x → 3.x a transition, which it
>> > is),
>> > which would mean a new round of adapation for users installing Debian
>> > from
>> > scratch, and only after two years after getting used to the GNOME 3
>> > workflow.
>> > jessie's GNOME 3.x release should be a lot more polished than what we
>> > shipped
>> > with wheezy, which means many of the rough edges and annoyances people
>> > may
>> > have found when upgrading from squeeze are probably now ironed out.

So, we should move, yet again, before any CDs get burned, lest anyone
doubt debian's allegiance to the one-true-and-coming-OS?

(I should have held my tongue on that, I suppose, since these are the
dev lists, and I am making some serious requests below.)

>> > Many members of the Debian GNOME team feel shipping Xfce by default
>> > would
>> > mean regressing in a few key areas like, as mentioned before,
>> > accessibility,
>> > localisation and documentation of the default set of applications. We
>> > are wary
>> > about the state of some features of the current default with respect
>> > to power management and bluetooth, for example. These features are
>> > driven by,
>> > and working since day 1, by GNOME 3.12.
>> >
>> > Jordi
>> > --
>> > Jordi Mallach Pérez  --  Debian developer http://www.debian.org/
>> > jo...@sindominio.net jo...@debian.org http://www.sindominio.net/
>> > GnuPG public key information available at http://oskuro.net/

Two years from now, your list of reasons might make sense.

Right now, there has been no time to gather the sort of statistics
needed to support your assertions.

But, and I mean this seriously, since debian has made the move to
systemd, it seems to me that your assertions are superfluous. It makes
no sense not to make Gnome3 the default DE.

That means, I think, that it also makes no sense to have a CD install
image other than netinstall.

It would be nice if the install media made DE options a little more
accessible than is currently the case.

I'm not sure if my memories here are from debian, but it seems to me
that it used to be fairly easy to select, say, a desktop productivity
set of initial packages and then go in and change the DE from Gnome2
to XFCE.

Last time I tried the easy install, I didn't see any way to do that,
and I ended up having to remove Gnome3 and install XFCE after the
first boot.

-- 
Joel Rees

Be careful where you see conspiracy.
Look first in your own heart.

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/caar43iofaofevnotsmnrbatqmwnvgm5p7ah_rqj1n4gvcdg...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

(Sure wish I could get drivers for this Acer tablet so I could get replace
the vendor-constricted Android with a real OS and get software that
wouldn't misinterpret what my fingers do on the screen. But, then, I
suppose I should go to the trouble of booting up a regular computer for
this.)

2014/08/11 7:32 "Joel Rees" :
>
> 2014/08/08 6:58 "Jordi Mallach" :
>
> >
> > Hi Debian,
> >
> > It's been around 9 months since tasksel changed (for real) the default
> > desktop for new installs. At the time of the change, it was mentioned
> > the issue would be revisited before the freeze, around debconf time.
> >
> > Well, it's roughly that time. :) So I'd like to plainly request GNOME is
> > reinstated as the default desktop environment for a number of reasons.
>
> First thought: Since systemd has been chosen as the one true way of the
future, it seems only obvious that GNOME should be the default desktop.
>
> > Accessibility: GNOME continues to be the only free desktop environment
that
> > provides full accessibility coverage, right from login screen. While
it’s true
> > GNOME 3.0 was lacking in many areas, and GNOME 3.4 (which we shipped in
wheezy)
> > was just barely acceptable thanks to some last minute GDM fixes, GNOME
3.12
> > should have ironed out all of the issues and our non-expert
understanding is
> > that a11y support is now on par with what GNOME 2.30 from squeeze
offered.
>
> There are a number of regular participants on debian-user who have a11y
needs. Would it be too much to ask, to ask them whether GNOME meets their
needs?
>
> > Downstream health: The number of active members in the team taking care
of
> > GNOME in Debian is around 5-10 persons, while it is 1-2 in the case of
Xfce.
> > Being the default desktop draws a lot of attention (and bug reports)
that only
> > a bigger team might have the resources to handle.
>
> It has been mentioned in the past, but developers work on what they want
to work on. That may or may not be related to whether a particular DE is
appropriate for general rcommendation.
>
> > Upstream health: While GNOME is still committed to its time-based
release
> > schedule and ships new versions every 6 months, Xfce upstream is,
> > unfortunately, struggling a bit more to keep up with new plumbing
technology.
> > Only very recently it has regained support to suspend/hibernate via
logind, or
> > support for Bluez 5.x, for example.
>
> Should consider the reasons for the breakage, as well.
>
> > Community: GNOME is one of the biggest free software projects, and is
lucky to
> > have created an ecosystem of developers, documenters, translators and
users
> > that interact regularly in a live social community. Users and
developers gather
> > in hackfests and big, annual conferences like GUADEC, the Boston
Summit, or
> > GNOME.Asia. Only KDE has a comparable community, the rest of the free
desktop
> > projects don’t have the userbase or manpower to sustain communities
like this.
>
> With a community that big, would it be unreasonable to ask them to
maintain their own distro? Or perhaps their own liveCD? Eh, well, liveSD.
>
> > Localization: Localization is more extensive and complete in GNOME.
 Xfce has
> > 18 languages above 95% of coverage, and 2 at 100% (excluding English),
GNOME
> > has 28 languages above 95%, 9 of them being complete (excluding
English).
>
> LOL.
>
> No, seriously, is there any meaning to the claim of "complete"?
>
> I've seen a lot of bad Japanese translation, recently, that, if I had
more time, I'd file bugs on.
>
> > Documentation: Documentation coverage is extensive in GNOME, with most
of the
> > core applications providing localized, up to date and complete manuals,
> > available in an accessible format via the Help reader.
>
> See above. Documentation and translation have something in common here.
Particularly since documentation should be translation from technical
language to the more common vernacular.
>
> > Hardware: GNOME 3.12 will be one of the few desktop environments to
support
> > HiDPI displays, now very common on some laptop models. Lack of support
for
> > HiDPI means non-technical users will get an unreadable desktop by
default, and
> > no hints on how to fix that.

I'm thinking this sounds like an argument for postponing freeze.

> > Security: GNOME is more secure. There are no processes launched with
root
> > permissions on the user’s session. All everyday operations (package
management,
> > disk partitioning and formatting, date/time configuration…) are
accomplished
> > through PolicyKit wrappers.

With the volume of new code, can such claims be serious?

> > Privacy: One of the latest focuses of GNOME development is improving
privacy,
> > and work is being done to make it easy to run GNOME applications in
isolated
> > containers, integrate Tor seamlessly in the desktop experience, better
disk
> > encryption support and other features that should make GNOME a more
secure
> > desktop environment for end users.

TOR has what to do with real priv

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014/08/08 6:58 "Jordi Mallach" :
>
> Hi Debian,
>
> It's been around 9 months since tasksel changed (for real) the default
> desktop for new installs. At the time of the change, it was mentioned
> the issue would be revisited before the freeze, around debconf time.
>
> Well, it's roughly that time. :) So I'd like to plainly request GNOME is
> reinstated as the default desktop environment for a number of reasons.

First thought: Since systemd has been chosen as the one true way of the
future, it seems only obvious that GNOME should be the default desktop.

> Accessibility: GNOME continues to be the only free desktop environment
that
> provides full accessibility coverage, right from login screen. While it’s
true
> GNOME 3.0 was lacking in many areas, and GNOME 3.4 (which we shipped in
wheezy)
> was just barely acceptable thanks to some last minute GDM fixes, GNOME
3.12
> should have ironed out all of the issues and our non-expert understanding
is
> that a11y support is now on par with what GNOME 2.30 from squeeze offered.

There are a number of regular participants on debian-user who have a11y
needs. Would it be too much to ask, to ask them whether GNOME meets their
needs?

> Downstream health: The number of active members in the team taking care of
> GNOME in Debian is around 5-10 persons, while it is 1-2 in the case of
Xfce.
> Being the default desktop draws a lot of attention (and bug reports) that
only
> a bigger team might have the resources to handle.

It has been mentioned in the past, but developers work on what they want to
work on. That may or may not be related to whether a particular DE is
appropriate for general rcommendation.

> Upstream health: While GNOME is still committed to its time-based release
> schedule and ships new versions every 6 months, Xfce upstream is,
> unfortunately, struggling a bit more to keep up with new plumbing
technology.
> Only very recently it has regained support to suspend/hibernate via
logind, or
> support for Bluez 5.x, for example.

Should consider the reasons for the breakage, as well.

> Community: GNOME is one of the biggest free software projects, and is
lucky to
> have created an ecosystem of developers, documenters, translators and
users
> that interact regularly in a live social community. Users and developers
gather
> in hackfests and big, annual conferences like GUADEC, the Boston Summit,
or
> GNOME.Asia. Only KDE has a comparable community, the rest of the free
desktop
> projects don’t have the userbase or manpower to sustain communities like
this.

With a community that big, would it be unreasonable to ask them to maintain
their own distro? Or perhaps their own liveCD? Eh, well, liveSD.

> Localization: Localization is more extensive and complete in GNOME.  Xfce
has
> 18 languages above 95% of coverage, and 2 at 100% (excluding English),
GNOME
> has 28 languages above 95%, 9 of them being complete (excluding English).

LOL.

No, seriously, is there any meaning to the claim of "complete"?

I've seen a lot of bad Japanese translation, recently, that, if I had more
time, I'd file bugs on.

> Documentation: Documentation coverage is extensive in GNOME, with most of
the
> core applications providing localized, up to date and complete manuals,
> available in an accessible format via the Help reader.

See above. Documentation and translation have something in common here.
Particularly since documentation should be translation from technical
language to the more common vernacular.

> Hardware: GNOME 3.12 will be one of the few desktop environments to
support
> HiDPI displays, now very common on some laptop models. Lack of support for
> HiDPI means non-technical users will get an unreadable desktop by
default, and
> no hints on how to fix that.
>
> Security: GNOME is more secure. There are no processes launched with root
> permissions on the user’s session. All everyday operations (package
management,
> disk partitioning and formatting, date/time configuration…) are
accomplished
> through PolicyKit wrappers.
>
> Privacy: One of the latest focuses of GNOME development is improving
privacy,
> and work is being done to make it easy to run GNOME applications in
isolated
> containers, integrate Tor seamlessly in the desktop experience, better
disk
> encryption support and other features that should make GNOME a more secure
> desktop environment for end users.
>
> Popularity: One of the metrics discussed by the tasksel change proponents
> mentioned popcon numbers. 8 months after the desktop change, Xfce does
not seem
> to have made a dent on install numbers.  The Debian GNOME team doesn’t
feel
> popcon’s data is any better than a random online poll though, as it’s an
opt-in
> service which the vast majority of users don’t enable.
>
> systemd embracing: One of the reasons to switch to Xfce was that it didn’t
> depend on systemd. But now that systemd is the default, that shouldn’t be
a
> problem. Also given ConsoleKit is deprecated and dead upstream, KDE and
Xfce
> a

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014/08/08 18:14 "Yves-Alexis Perez" :
>
> [...]
>
> Put it another way, Xfce (and other DEs) have been hurt by the various
> enforced transitions (ConsoleKit,
> hal/devicekit-power/upower/upower-0.99), yes. Combined with the lack of
> resources, that means it lays behind the people who decided those
> transitions.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Yves-Alexis

As a user trying to find to participate more, can I put a huge "+1" on that?

(Lots of things I'd like to help with on XFCE, among other things, but the
recent transitions have been eating what time I might have had, plus a bit
of work time I can't afford.)

--
Joel Rees

Computer memory is just fancy paper,
CPUs just fancy pens.
All is a stream of text
flowing from the past into the future.

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-10 Thread David Weinehall

On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> 
> The issue here really is "how big is it?" rather than "hos many disks 
> [of which kind] does it fit onto?".
> 
> "unable to fit on a single image" is not only about use of said storage 
> devices for installation, but also an indication more generally of how 
> much data needs to be transfered on average for a usable installation.
> 
> Quite a few places in the World have poor and/or expensive internet 
> access.  Larger default desktop will hurt the most in developing 
> countries: non-techies gets discourages to use Debian at all, or when 
> using it may apply security fixes less often.

In all cases where I'm stuck with expensive (and/or slow) Internet
I sure as hell pick the netinst image and download the minimum set of
packages I need, rather than a whole CD image on the offhand chance that
I might need everything on it (which is exceedingly unlikely).

If, on the other hand, I download a CD-image somewhere else to burn it
and then bring it home, the image will always be full CD-size (or are
you suggesting that we start distributing half-empty CD-images?).

So, as long as GNOME fits on the first installation CD I see no reason
not to prefer it over XFCE.

Kind regards, David
-- 
 /) David Weinehall  /) Rime on my window   (\
//  ~   //  Diamond-white roses of fire //
\)  http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/(/   Beautiful hoar-frost   (/

-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140810205944.gc2...@hirohito.acc.umu.se

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-10 Thread Tiago Bortoletto Vaz

On 08/10/2014 02:39 PM, Kees de Jong wrote:
> Why are we discussing CD/DVD sizes? Why not just use an USB
> netinstall? It's then possible to download and install the stuff you
> need, if you don't want to use a lot of bandwidth then choose no
> desktop environment or XFCE/LXDE. But if you can spare some more time
> then you can install GNOME/KDE. Seems like a good deal. And USB sticks
> are cheaper (also easier to reuse) so I don't get the 'hurting
> developing countries' argument.

Old machines don't boot USB.

-- 
tiago


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53e7cb9d.6080...@acaia.ca

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-10 Thread Kees de Jong

Why are we discussing CD/DVD sizes? Why not just use an USB
netinstall? It's then possible to download and install the stuff you
need, if you don't want to use a lot of bandwidth then choose no
desktop environment or XFCE/LXDE. But if you can spare some more time
then you can install GNOME/KDE. Seems like a good deal. And USB sticks
are cheaper (also easier to reuse) so I don't get the 'hurting
developing countries' argument.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/CAAH150ZMiVBtY21Es06y3djZrQ+=eAEYDenLJJoYby=ajos...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-09 Thread Camaleón

On Sat, 09 Aug 2014 09:08:07 -0400, Stephen Allen wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 03:52:46PM +, Camaleón wrote:
>> On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 11:14:07 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
>> 
>> > On jeu., 2014-08-07 at 23:57 +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote:
>> >> Hi Debian,
>> > 
>> > About the decision itself, as Debian Xfce main maintainer, I honestly
>> > don't really care. I don't think the default desktop matters that
>> > much on Debian (while I guess it means a lot for Ubuntu, for
>> > example). I actually think having no default desktop would be just
>> > fine, instead having the current 3-4 desktop installation media. Then
>> > anyone can pick the DE she likes.
>> 
>> (...)
>> 
>> I really (and still) like the idea of having no default desktop at all
>> and let the users decide by themselves if they even want to get a DE
>> when performing a DVD based installation.
>> 
>>
> Give them a choice of the main 3 or 4 with thumbnails of each at default
> view with short explanation:  Gnome-Shell for modern computers with
> 3D capability: XFce4 for older computers with low memory and/or older
> video cards not capable of playing advanced graphical games etc.,
> 
> Then direct each to appropriate DVD/CD/Netinstall image to download or
> sources list to add.

The issue here is that once the user has downloaded a DVD, what's the DE 
the installer should go with when choosing an automated/basic install. And 
I still think the installer has to full stop at this point and ask the 
user what is what he/she wants; that's, IMO, the fairest proceeding 
possible.

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/pan.2014.08.09.13.18...@gmail.com

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-09 Thread Stephen Allen

On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 03:52:46PM +, Camaleón wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 11:14:07 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:
> 
> > On jeu., 2014-08-07 at 23:57 +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> >> Hi Debian,
> > 
> > About the decision itself, as Debian Xfce main maintainer, I honestly
> > don't really care. I don't think the default desktop matters that much
> > on Debian (while I guess it means a lot for Ubuntu, for example). I
> > actually think having no default desktop would be just fine, instead
> > having the current 3-4 desktop installation media. Then anyone can pick
> > the DE she likes.
> 
> (...)
> 
> I really (and still) like the idea of having no default desktop at all 
> and let the users decide by themselves if they even want to get a DE when 
> performing a DVD based installation.
> 
> Greetings,
>
Give them a choice of the main 3 or 4 with thumbnails of each at default
view with short explanation:  Gnome-Shell for modern computers with
3D capability: XFce4 for older computers with low memory and/or older
video cards not capable of playing advanced graphical games etc.,

Then direct each to appropriate DVD/CD/Netinstall image to download or
sources list to add. 


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140809130807.GA2394@Jessie

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-09 Thread Yves-Alexis Perez

On ven., 2014-08-08 at 18:38 -0700, Paul C. Bryan wrote:
> With all due respect to XFCE, I'd hate the interpretation to be along
> the lines of, "Oh, Debian state of the art desktop environment feels
> something like Windows, circa 2000." But, XFCE's lightweight. It's
> meant
> to lack such fancy features.

I'm unsure what you mean by that. We don't do specific efforts to tune
Xfce appearance (that's not really our priority indeed), but you might
want to take a look at Xubuntu customization if eye candy is what
interest you.

Regards,
-- 
Yves-Alexis

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Enrico Zini

On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 03:29:26PM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:

> Specifically: 1) Would you want the default CD/DVD image to use a GNOME
> even if GNOME was unable to fit on a single image? 2) Would the GNOME
> team consider a less-complete DE for cases where image size is a
> restriction?

How hard/sane would it be to have XFCE as default on installation CDs
and Gnome3 as default on installation DVDs or netinst CDs?

That way, people with disconnected, old computer get XFCE which has a
higher chance of working there. People with computers that either
have a DVD or a fast network connection, would instead default to the
heavier/more-feature-complete desktop.

Enrico "either way, I use lxde :P"

-- 
GPG key: 4096R/E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini 

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread MENGUAL Jean-Philippe


Hi,

I don't know if it's wise to include that by default, but I remember 
that today, MATE is quite accessible. Not perfet, yes, but slight, 
customizable, and with Compiz which can run on it with all its features. 
Gnome is heavy for some machines and much less customizable in colours, 
objects size, etc. So I think the question should be considered. All the 
more as if it is, it will support its maintainance upstream and in 
Debian, to improve things. Here, it's much slighter than GNOME.


However, indeed, I'm not sure XFCE is the good solution, likely not for 
a11y anyway.


Regards,

Le 08/08/2014 17:23, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit :

Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-08-08 16:19:28)

Jonas Smedegaard, le Fri 08 Aug 2014 16:11:58 +0200, a écrit :

The following is on a wheezy chroot:

root@bastian:/# aptitude install task-gnome-desktop
The following NEW packages will be installed:
[...]
Need to get 370 MB of archives. After unpacking 1099 MB will be used.

root@bastian:/# aptitude install task-xfce-desktop
The following NEW packages will be installed:
[...]
Need to get 115 MB of archives. After unpacking 348 MB will be used.

Desktop needing 370MB versus 115MB seems pretty significant to me.

Actually it's 1.1GiB versus 348MiB. But that is barring the rest of
the desktop.

If the concern was e.g. price of harddisk to install on, then the
finally used disk space be the measure.

...but the concern I raised is bandwidth for packages to be installed -
which over-simplified can be expressed as "does it fit on a CD?".

Numbers for Sid (in a chroot for task package, not for a full install),
is 389MB versus 101MB.



More precise measurements can be found in the installation manual, for
which we also install task-desktop etc. which ends up with 3.2GiB for
Gnome & KDE, 2.3GiB for XFCE, 2GiB for LXDE.

I believe (but haven't checked) that installation manual don't document
bandwidth needs - in the past users could simply assume "a single
desktop fits on first CD".


  - Jonas




--

Jean-Philippe MENGUAL

accelibreinfo, votre partenaire en informatique adaptée aux déficients visuels

Mail: te...@accelibreinfo.eu

Site Web: http://www.accelibreinfo.eu


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53e5060e.9080...@free.fr

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread brian m. carlson

On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 10:34:29PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > > Well, it's roughly that time. :) So I'd like to plainly request GNOME
> > > is reinstated as the default desktop environment for a number of
> > > reasons.
> > 
> > One of the reasons put forward for switching to Xfce was size on the
> > installation images; could you (and/or debian-cd) address this?
> > 
> > Specifically: 1) Would you want the default CD/DVD image to use a GNOME
> > even if GNOME was unable to fit on a single image? 2) Would the GNOME
> > team consider a less-complete DE for cases where image size is a
> > restriction?
> 
> ...And I'd like us to consider this point as well: How important are
> CD images nowadays? Who has a CD that cannot read a DVD? Will they be
> able to use on said machine a modern desktop environment as
> resource-demanding as, say, i3 or fvwm?

I used to do freelance desktop support (in the US) and there are a
decent number of machines that don't have DVD drives.  You would be
surprised how resistant people are to upgrade their machines.  (Also,
people give their old, less powerful machines to the small kids.)  Most
of these machines would work just fine with XFCE, but not GNOME.

DVD drives are also less common on non-PC hardware, especially the older
stuff that can be readily acquired for less than USD 1000.

Also, I always carried a bootable CD with me, because about a third of
machines just won't boot off a USB flash drive for any reason.  The BIOS
says they will, but it's a lie.  I've even owned one of these machines
(a fairly recent amd64 box).

I would recommend keeping CD images around.

-- 
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
+1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Camaleón

On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 18:47:59 +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:

> Quoting Camaleón (2014-08-08 18:26:22)
>> On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:09:56 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Camaleón wrote:
 I really (and still) like the idea of having no default desktop at 
 all and let the users decide by themselves if they even want to get 
 a DE when performing a DVD based installation.
>>> 
>>> Including all potential DE options on the main install disc (so the 
>>> user can make that choice in a no-net install) will mean a huge 
>>> bandwidth increase, not to mention that probably means bluray-only.
>>
>> I think there's no need to make any change about the DE options for 
>> the first DVD, current ones (gnome, kde, xfce and lxde, AFAIK) are OK 
>> as long as the installation menu is adapted to ask the user which DE 
>> to install or to no install a DE at all.
> 
> I guess many of those who can afford a system with Blueray reader and 
> waste bandwidth downloading an image for Blueray (which is needed for 
> offering multiple desktops during install, I believe) likely would want 
> a shiny desktop like GNOME or KDE.

I don't think so. 

In fact, what I do is getting the first DVD ISO image and install from 
there, though I have a quite good Internet connection (FTTH) and manage a 
mixed environment with servers (no DE here), workstations and desktops 
computers (where I install a DE).

And given the first DVD already contains four DE, I don't see any good 
reason to remove them, unless space is now getting a concern. Anyway, 
despite the DE available on there, I still think no default selection 
would be desiderable.

> I don't expect that to be a common install media, however.

Neither do I. Blu-ray has been always on my "not-to-buy" list.

>>> There already exist netinst media that solve that problem much better
>>> by including no DE packages on the media.
>>
>> Netinst media and other install options are not the main subject of 
>> this thread.
> 
> Wrong.
> 
> This thread is about "default desktop", not "default desktop on CD/DVD".
>
> It is about which default we suggest for our users.

AFAIK, there's only one medium (because of its size) that "forces" you to 
choose a default DE and that's DVD (and/or Blu-ray). CDs provide their own 
ISO for every desktop flavor so you download the desired one.

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/pan.2014.08.08.17.38...@gmail.com

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

Quoting Camaleón (2014-08-08 18:26:22)
> On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:09:56 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Camaleón wrote:
>>> I really (and still) like the idea of having no default desktop at 
>>> all and let the users decide by themselves if they even want to get 
>>> a DE when performing a DVD based installation.
>> 
>> Including all potential DE options on the main install disc (so the 
>> user can make that choice in a no-net install) will mean a huge 
>> bandwidth increase, not to mention that probably means bluray-only.
>
> I think there's no need to make any change about the DE options for 
> the first DVD, current ones (gnome, kde, xfce and lxde, AFAIK) are OK 
> as long as the installation menu is adapted to ask the user which DE 
> to install or to no install a DE at all.

I guess many of those who can afford a system with Blueray reader and 
waste bandwidth downloading an image for Blueray (which is needed for 
offering multiple desktops during install, I believe) likely would want 
a shiny desktop like GNOME or KDE.

I don't expect that to be a common install media, however.


>> There already exist netinst media that solve that problem much better by
>> including no DE packages on the media.
>
> Netinst media and other install options are not the main subject of this 
> thread.

Wrong.

This thread is about "default desktop", not "default desktop on CD/DVD".

It is about which default we suggest for our users.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Camaleón

On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:09:56 -0400, Michael Gilbert wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Camaleón wrote:
>> I really (and still) like the idea of having no default desktop at all
>> and let the users decide by themselves if they even want to get a DE
>> when performing a DVD based installation.
> 
> Including all potential DE options on the main install disc (so the user
> can make that choice in a no-net install) will mean a huge bandwidth
> increase, not to mention that probably means bluray-only.

I think there's no need to make any change about the DE options for the 
first DVD, current ones (gnome, kde, xfce and lxde, AFAIK) are OK as long 
as the installation menu is adapted to ask the user which DE to install 
or to no install a DE at all.

> There already exist netinst media that solve that problem much better by
> including no DE packages on the media.

Netinst media and other install options are not the main subject of this 
thread.

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/pan.2014.08.08.16.26...@gmail.com

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Michael Gilbert

On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Camaleón wrote:
> I really (and still) like the idea of having no default desktop at all
> and let the users decide by themselves if they even want to get a DE when
> performing a DVD based installation.

Including all potential DE options on the main install disc (so the
user can make that choice in a no-net install) will mean a huge
bandwidth increase, not to mention that probably means bluray-only.

There already exist netinst media that solve that problem much better
by including no DE packages on the media.

Best wishes,
Mike

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/CANTw=MO1_EwWrpCvWML6B0u_=y8z8bvoiyumhq8efdscziy...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Camaleón

On Fri, 08 Aug 2014 11:14:07 +0200, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote:

> On jeu., 2014-08-07 at 23:57 +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote:
>> Hi Debian,
> 
> About the decision itself, as Debian Xfce main maintainer, I honestly
> don't really care. I don't think the default desktop matters that much
> on Debian (while I guess it means a lot for Ubuntu, for example). I
> actually think having no default desktop would be just fine, instead
> having the current 3-4 desktop installation media. Then anyone can pick
> the DE she likes.

(...)

I really (and still) like the idea of having no default desktop at all 
and let the users decide by themselves if they even want to get a DE when 
performing a DVD based installation.

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/pan.2014.08.08.15.52...@gmail.com

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-08-08 16:19:28)
> Jonas Smedegaard, le Fri 08 Aug 2014 16:11:58 +0200, a écrit :
>> The following is on a wheezy chroot:
>> 
>> root@bastian:/# aptitude install task-gnome-desktop
>> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>> [...]
>> Need to get 370 MB of archives. After unpacking 1099 MB will be used.
>> 
>> root@bastian:/# aptitude install task-xfce-desktop
>> The following NEW packages will be installed:
>> [...]
>> Need to get 115 MB of archives. After unpacking 348 MB will be used.
>> 
>> Desktop needing 370MB versus 115MB seems pretty significant to me.
>
> Actually it's 1.1GiB versus 348MiB. But that is barring the rest of 
> the desktop.

If the concern was e.g. price of harddisk to install on, then the 
finally used disk space be the measure.

...but the concern I raised is bandwidth for packages to be installed - 
which over-simplified can be expressed as "does it fit on a CD?".

Numbers for Sid (in a chroot for task package, not for a full install), 
is 389MB versus 101MB.


> More precise measurements can be found in the installation manual, for 
> which we also install task-desktop etc. which ends up with 3.2GiB for 
> Gnome & KDE, 2.3GiB for XFCE, 2GiB for LXDE.

I believe (but haven't checked) that installation manual don't document 
bandwidth needs - in the past users could simply assume "a single 
desktop fits on first CD".


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Ian Jackson

Gunnar Wolf writes ("Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop"):
> And yes, many such computers are currently in use. And it would be a
> disservice not to provide CDs anymore. But that criteria should not be
> what guides our default for installation; a CD might not be able to
> have the full GNOME environment, but the computer using the CD would
> not be able to use it anyway.

Wouldn't such a computer be able to use xfce ?  I have a computer from
2003-2005 that seems to be running xfce perfectly happily (and I have
reinstalled it recently).

Ian.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/21476.57043.847379.678...@chiark.greenend.org.uk

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Samuel Thibault

Jonas Smedegaard, le Fri 08 Aug 2014 16:11:58 +0200, a écrit :
> The following is on a wheezy chroot:
> 
> root@bastian:/# aptitude install task-gnome-desktop
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> [...]
> Need to get 370 MB of archives. After unpacking 1099 MB will be used.
> 
> root@bastian:/# aptitude install task-xfce-desktop
> The following NEW packages will be installed:
> [...]
> Need to get 115 MB of archives. After unpacking 348 MB will be used.
> 
> Desktop needing 370MB versus 115MB seems pretty significant to me.

Actually it's 1.1GiB versus 348MiB. But that is barring the rest of the
desktop.

More precise measurements can be found in the installation manual, for
which we also install task-desktop etc. which ends up with 3.2GiB for
Gnome & KDE, 2.3GiB for XFCE, 2GiB for LXDE.

Samuel


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140808141928.ge3...@type.bordeaux.inria.fr

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

Quoting Olav Vitters (2014-08-08 15:51:13)
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 03:26:20PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
>> I wonder if you still missed my point: Concern is not if computers 
>> are capable of reading DVDs, but the *bandwith* burden of installing 
>> and maintaining a larger desktop versus a smaller one.
>
> This feels like shifting goalposts. The initial change to XFCE 
> mentioned the install size and that for some countries. A reply was 
> given specifically on this matter from someone with knowledge on 
> various affected countries. It was mentioned that install size is not 
> so much of a concern.
>
> Now suddenly it is about bandwidth usage? That is not what was said 
> initially.

Seems you are talking about other posts than mine.

What I said initially I still stand by.  Did you read that?

> Further, I'd like to see you provide more details on the higher 
> bandwidth usage that GNOME apparently has vs XFCE and how much it 
> impacts these countries.

The following is on a wheezy chroot:

root@bastian:/# aptitude install task-gnome-desktop
The following NEW packages will be installed:
[...]
Need to get 370 MB of archives. After unpacking 1099 MB will be used.

root@bastian:/# aptitude install task-xfce-desktop
The following NEW packages will be installed:
[...]
Need to get 115 MB of archives. After unpacking 348 MB will be used.

Desktop needing 370MB versus 115MB seems pretty significant to me.

 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

signature.asc
Description: signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

Quoting Gunnar Wolf (2014-08-08 15:00:35)
> Jens Schüßler dijo [Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 10:37:33AM +0200]:
>>> ...And I'd like us to consider this point as well: How important are 
>>> CD images nowadays? Who has a CD that cannot read a DVD?
>>
>> You may visit some poorer people in the world. 
>> But hey, if they want CD-bread, why don't they just eat DVD-cake.
> 
> Both Jens and Jonas answer with this assertion. Yes, I don't know most 
> of the developing world — But I do live in a developing country 
> (Mexico), and know quite well several countries in Latin America 
> (including, say, Bolivia, Ecuador and Central America, where I have 
> been to several times, and follow their communities' work).
>
> Yes, we do have quite a bit of outdated computers. But again, I said, 
> half-jokingly, that computers with CD readers and without a DVD reader 
> will not have enough power for a full desktop environment, such as i3 
> or fvwm. The last computer I had with a CD-but-not-DVD unit was in the 
> 2003-2005 period.
>
> And yes, many such computers are currently in use. And it would be a 
> disservice not to provide CDs anymore. But that criteria should not be 
> what guides our default for installation; a CD might not be able to 
> have the full GNOME environment, but the computer using the CD would 
> not be able to use it anyway.

I wonder if you still missed my point: Concern is not if computers are 
capable of reading DVDs, but the *bandwith* burden of installing and 
maintaining a larger desktop versus a smaller one.

We can ship only netinst images - completely drop CD and DVD and 
Blueray, and I still find it problematic to favor GNOME over Xfce - due 
to its size - which just happens to be expressed in discussions as "can 
it fit on a single CD?".

The _default_ Debian desktop is what we implicitly recommend for our 
non-technical users, no matter the wealth of alternative offers we have.


 - Jonas

-- 
 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private


signature.asc
Description: signature

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Gunnar Wolf

Jens Schüßler dijo [Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 10:37:33AM +0200]:
> > ...And I'd like us to consider this point as well: How important are
> > CD images nowadays? Who has a CD that cannot read a DVD? 
> 
> You may visit some poorer people in the world. 
> But hey, if they want CD-bread, why don't they just eat DVD-cake.

Both Jens and Jonas answer with this assertion. Yes, I don't know most
of the developing world — But I do live in a developing country
(Mexico), and know quite well several countries in Latin America
(including, say, Bolivia, Ecuador and Central America, where I have
been to several times, and follow their communities' work).

Yes, we do have quite a bit of outdated computers. But again, I said,
half-jokingly, that computers with CD readers and without a DVD reader
will not have enough power for a full desktop environment, such as i3
or fvwm. The last computer I had with a CD-but-not-DVD unit was in
the 2003-2005 period.

And yes, many such computers are currently in use. And it would be a
disservice not to provide CDs anymore. But that criteria should not be
what guides our default for installation; a CD might not be able to
have the full GNOME environment, but the computer using the CD would
not be able to use it anyway.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140808130035.ga108...@gwolf.org

Re: [Pkg-xfce-devel] Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Yves-Alexis Perez

On jeu., 2014-08-07 at 23:57 +0200, Jordi Mallach wrote:
> Hi Debian,

About the decision itself, as Debian Xfce main maintainer, I honestly
don't really care. I don't think the default desktop matters that much
on Debian (while I guess it means a lot for Ubuntu, for example). I
actually think having no default desktop would be just fine, instead
having the current 3-4 desktop installation media. Then anyone can pick
the DE she likes.

Now, about specific items:

> Downstream health: The number of active members in the team taking care of
> GNOME in Debian is around 5-10 persons, while it is 1-2 in the case of Xfce.
> Being the default desktop draws a lot of attention (and bug reports) that only
> a bigger team might have the resources to handle.

Indeed. I somehow hoped that the attention brought on the initial switch
would bring more developpers to the pkg-xfce team, but that failed. But
I'm unsure how much people actually saw the switch, since it's only for
the current beta installers for Jessie…
> 
> Upstream health: While GNOME is still committed to its time-based release
> schedule and ships new versions every 6 months, Xfce upstream is,
> unfortunately, struggling a bit more to keep up with new plumbing technology.
> Only very recently it has regained support to suspend/hibernate via logind, or
> support for Bluez 5.x, for example.

Same as above.

> Hardware: GNOME 3.12 will be one of the few desktop environments to support
> HiDPI displays, now very common on some laptop models. Lack of support for
> HiDPI means non-technical users will get an unreadable desktop by default, and
> no hints on how to fix that.

Well, considering Xorg harcodes DPI to 96, what's the problem anyway?
Also, with DPI correctly set to 140 on my Thinkpad (not really HiDPI but
still more than 96), the only problems I've seen is chromium since it
dropped GTK (#749239 where the URL bar font is oversized and the menu
fonts are unreadable).
> 
> Security: GNOME is more secure. There are no processes launched with root
> permissions on the user’s session. All everyday operations (package 
> management,
> disk partitioning and formatting, date/time configuration…) are accomplished
> through PolicyKit wrappers.

That doesn't make much sense to me. It seems you're considering GNOME as
a distribution more than a desktop environment. That's not how Xfce sees
it. It relies on stuff like PolicyKit for interactions with hardware,
for example, but it doesn't really ship anything which should be run as
root. The user is free to do anything she wants, though.
> 
> Privacy: One of the latest focuses of GNOME development is improving privacy,
> and work is being done to make it easy to run GNOME applications in isolated
> containers, integrate Tor seamlessly in the desktop experience, better disk
> encryption support and other features that should make GNOME a more secure
> desktop environment for end users.

Again, for me that's somehow unrelated to the DE, but my vision is less
about having a DE which does everything and more about having it only
handle things like session, window management, file management (each
component appart). It's perfectly possible to use GNOME components in
Xfce, and actually a lot of people do that.

> systemd embracing: One of the reasons to switch to Xfce was that it didn’t
> depend on systemd. But now that systemd is the default, that shouldn’t be a
> problem. Also given ConsoleKit is deprecated and dead upstream, KDE and Xfce
> are switching or are planning to switch to systemd/logind.

Not really. We relie on PolicyKit and used to use ConsoleKit because
that was somehow enforced on about everyone. Now ConsoleKit has been
deprecated, and the same people now enforce libpam-systemd and logind.
I'm fine with that, but the goal would be to support both systemd and
sysvrc/systemd-shim systems.

> Many members of the Debian GNOME team feel shipping Xfce by default would
> mean regressing in a few key areas like, as mentioned before, accessibility,
> localisation and documentation of the default set of applications. We are wary
> about the state of some features of the current default with respect
> to power management and bluetooth, for example. These features are driven by,
> and working since day 1, by GNOME 3.12.

Put it another way, Xfce (and other DEs) have been hurt by the various
enforced transitions (ConsoleKit,
hal/devicekit-power/upower/upower-0.99), yes. Combined with the lack of
resources, that means it lays behind the people who decided those
transitions.

Regards,
-- 
Yves-Alexis


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

2014-08-08 Thread Emilio Pozuelo Monfort

On 08/08/14 00:29, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Aug 2014, Jordi Mallach wrote:
>> Well, it's roughly that time. :) So I'd like to plainly request GNOME
>> is reinstated as the default desktop environment for a number of
>> reasons.
>
> One of the reasons put forward for switching to Xfce was size on the
> installation images; could you (and/or debian-cd) address this?
>
> Specifically:

> 1) Would you want the default CD/DVD image to use a GNOME
> even if GNOME was unable to fit on a single image?

I think the first CD/DVD should have whatever we choose as the default.

> 2) Would the GNOME
> team consider a less-complete DE for cases where image size is a
> restriction?

Yes. If there wasn't enough space, we could drop some not very important modules
(e.g. a few games), try a stronger compression ratio, symlink /usr/share/doc
directories... We'd need some numbers here but we could work something out.

Cheers,
Emilio


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53e49467.5010...@debian.org

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop