Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 03:28, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote: You may be aware that there was a recent initiative (from the marketing team, I think) to contact the release managers for various GNOME based I'm not sure who it might have been because this is the first I've heard of any thing like that but I can say with 98% certainty that it was not the Marketing Team. We are fully and exclusively on-focus for marketing the GNOME 3 release to our existing users and have been since October 2009. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi Johannes, Johannes Schmid wrote: GNOME 2.x will not get any more official support after the 2.32.1 relase which already happened. Single module maintainers may decide (or have already decided/done) to do more 2.32.x release to fix various bugs but no more official releases are planned. What do you call official? You may be aware that there was a recent initiative (from the marketing team, I think) to contact the release managers for various GNOME based distributions, and get them talking together about what they want to do to ensure a long term maintenance of some GNOME releases. This is essentially the same thing that GKH is co-ordinating in the kernel - certain kernel releases will be supported long term by distributions, and GKH is planning with distributors which ones fall into that category. Note: not doing the maintenance, but co-ordinating downstream so that they all agree to support the same thing. Similarly, there may be a number of distros who want to maintain 2.32 together, and we should enable that. It's not like anyone is going to ask module maintainers to fix bugs in branches they're not interested in - but we would expect them to allow others to commit fixes to those branches. This is not different from GNOME 2.30 for example. Distros that ship GNOME 2.30 (Ubuntu LTR for example) basically need to care themselves if they need to backport patches from newer releases of fix things themselves if it is specific to this GNOME release. GNOME never gave a promise to support any release any longer than 6 months. We should make it possible (or even easy) for distros to collaborate to do this kind of maintenance under GNOME, and push new point releases themselves. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi Jon, I'm confused... William Jon McCann wrote: On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote: Sure, it's not our priority nor target, in terms of development (and it shouldn't be). But to a lot of people, fallback means you'll get some ugly stuff that barely works, and while I do think we want to push people to use GNOME Shell, there's no reason to make users who can't use it feel second-class GNOME users. It is second class I don't think there is any point in whitewashing it. Whether or not you get something that barely works has everything to do with how much attention it gets in design, development, and testing. If you want to use something for a fallback that won't really get any of those three it had better be simple as hell. And ban any complexity that does not provide essential functionality. Last week I got the impression that you were proposing the removal of gnome-applets (and Orca) because of a lack of manpower required to bring them up to GNOME 3.0 standard and port to GTK+ 3. But now I have the impression that even if some people stepped up with a plan to bring applets to the fallback mode that you would be opposed to including this work. Is this a manpower issue, or a design issue? I feel like distributors' decision to ship GNOME 3 or not in their post-March releases will depend on how the experience degrades for 2D only users (and I am convinced there are many more of these than this thread suggests). Your advice to stick with GNOME 2.32 if you don't want the GNOME 3 experience may well be the advice that a number of distributions take, for fear of alienating part of their user base. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 10:28:42AM +0100, Dave Neary wrote: Hi Johannes, Johannes Schmid wrote: GNOME 2.x will not get any more official support after the 2.32.1 relase which already happened. Single module maintainers may decide (or have already decided/done) to do more 2.32.x release to fix various bugs but no more official releases are planned. What do you call official? Above reflects the thought of the release team. Meaning: We won't do any 2.x releases anymore. This is also clearly reflected in our schedule. Maintainers can of course deviate. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Orca (was Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?)
Hey guys. It is second class I don't think there is any point in whitewashing it. Whether or not you get something that barely works has everything to do with how much attention it gets in design, development, and testing. If you want to use something for a fallback that won't really get any of those three it had better be simple as hell. And ban any complexity that does not provide essential functionality. Last week I got the impression that you were proposing the removal of gnome-applets (and Orca) because of a lack of manpower required to bring them up to GNOME 3.0 standard and port to GTK+ 3. So about Orca :-) 1. Most of what Orca does is provide access. It has very few GUI components of its own, but still does a lot of (unseen) work to present the current environment to the user. 2. We would be happy to do what needs to be done to make Orca's very few GUI components more GNOME 3.0ish. 3. We are about to do the port to GTK+ 3. In fact, the GNOME 3.0 work will be supported by the Andalucían government. And in general we're still working quite hard -- I'd argue extremely hard -- on Orca's support for applications and toolkits. That we've been placed in the same category as the applets makes me wonder if Ale and I should be seeking a new home for the project. Doing so would sadden me as I care tremendously about GNOME. But if that is the decision that has been made by the Powers That Be, it would be nice to have an official heads-up. Please advise. Thanks. --joanie ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Am Donnerstag, den 30.12.2010, 15:55 -0600 schrieb Brian Cameron: Regardless of whether the GNOME community provides any more official support after 2.32.1, distros will continue to support their supported products. Distros could work together in these efforts. I see no reason why such collaboration could not happen within the GNOME community. For example there is the distributor-list@ mailing list which is not much used currently. andre -- mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Le mercredi 29 décembre 2010 à 15:22 -0500, William Jon McCann a écrit : That simple JS based fallback panel/menubar idea is sounding better and better... anyone want to give it a shot? This would be completely useless. Who would use that? People are not attached to the panel just because they don’t like change (although that’s certainly part of the picture). They are also attached to it because it is good. You cannot just ship a third-class application and hope that people will start using it just because the shell doesn’t work well on their hardware. For example, I cannot personally consider the shell as usable as long as it features those unusable two-dimensional iPhone menus - not counting the fact I don’t own hardware that can run it. The panel’s menu is simply better thought. In the first years of existence of the shell, you can expect the “classic” panel+metacity experience to gather more users than, say, LXDE - it will probably be more comparable to Xfce in terms of popularity. Just because it is popular (and for good reasons), you can expect several distributions to keep on shipping the panel as long as technically feasible with their resources. Not as a fallback or a stripped down session, but as a full-fledged alternative to the GNOME 3 shell, that you can choose from GDM once installed. Cheers, -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone, `-[…] I will see what I can do for you.” -- Jörg Schilling signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes: Le mercredi 29 décembre 2010 à 15:22 -0500, William Jon McCann a écrit : That simple JS based fallback panel/menubar idea is sounding better and better... anyone want to give it a shot? This would be completely useless. Who would use that? Just because it is popular (and for good reasons), you can expect several distributions to keep on shipping the panel as long as technically feasible with their resources. Not as a fallback or a stripped down session, but as a full-fledged alternative to the GNOME 3 shell, that you can choose from GDM once installed. You can also expect that installers won't be providing a choice between version 2 and version 3 of GNOME, but rather a choice between gnome-panel and gnome-shell, with gnome-panel possibly being the default. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi! For example, I cannot personally consider the shell as usable as long as it features those unusable two-dimensional iPhone menus - not counting the fact I don’t own hardware that can run it. The panel’s menu is simply better thought. Sidenote: check jhbuild of gnome-shell, it has categories again in the menu. So in the future, please don't express opinion on things that you haven't tested. And again this thread is not about gnome-shell features but about what we provide as fallback or what the future of gnome-panel is. If some interested people would put more resources into the gtk3-branch of gnome-panel there would be less discussion. Milan and Germán were kind enough to start working on it: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-panel/log/?h=gtk3 Thanks and regards, Johannes ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 06:54:04AM -0500, Bill O'Connor wrote: You can also expect that installers won't be providing a choice between version 2 and version 3 of GNOME, but rather a choice between gnome-panel and gnome-shell, with gnome-panel possibly being the default. Which distribution do you contribute to? And what does it matter if a distribution calls it either '2' or 'gnome-panel'? Think I don't really understand what you're after... -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Le jeudi 30 décembre 2010 à 13:08 +0100, Johannes Schmid a écrit : Sidenote: check jhbuild of gnome-shell, it has categories again in the menu. It is great to learn this has been finally fixed, thanks. So in the future, please don't express opinion on things that you haven't tested. I’m afraid I don’t run gnome-shell every day, since I have the - probably selfish - feeling that I have more valuable things to do than wondering how it would look if the animations were smooth. Sorry for polluting this thread. -- .''`. Josselin Mouette : :' : `. `' “If you behave this way because you are blackmailed by someone, `-[…] I will see what I can do for you.” -- Jörg Schilling signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Johannes Schmid wrote: For example, I cannot personally consider the shell as usable as long as it features those unusable two-dimensional iPhone menus - not counting the fact I don’t own hardware that can run it. The panel’s menu is simply better thought. Sidenote: check jhbuild of gnome-shell, it has categories again in the menu. [...] But there is a request by Jon to drop them, We don't want to use categorization in the app view., this is bug 638271. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=638271 Cheers, Fred ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Emmanuele: On 12/28/10 10:50 AM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 13:42 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: As pointed out before the fallback-mode is not a continuation of GNOME 2. It was just the easiest way to create a fallback because we don't have the resources to create a non-3D shell that could act as a fallback. As we have gnome-panel already it was choosen as the fallback mode. Is it an indication of a problem in gnome3 architecture? I don't see any problem here. I agree that there is no problem with GNOME moving towards OpenGL and acceleration. As you suggest, this is clearly the path to the future. However, there still are issues that the GNOME community needs to consider. For example, I have concerns about how GNOME 2.x is going to be maintained in the long run, and I think a lot of issues raised in this discussion relate to such concerns. To me, it seems that GNOME 2.32 and later 2.x releases were developed as transitional releases moving towards GNOME 3 without a clear roadmap for how GNOME 2 will be supported long-term. To me it is not clear whether those who intend to deliver GNOME 2.x-based solutions should ship GNOME 2.30, 2.32, some random mismash of module versions that you are able to get working, or what. It also is not clear what role(s) the GNOME community will play in helping different distros who ship and support GNOME 2 to work together and collaborate in that effort. I can understand that, at the moment, the GNOME community is more focused on getting GNOME 3 done right rather than focusing on long-term support issues with GNOME 2. However, in time, I think that GNOME 2 support issues will become an increasingly important issue that will require attention. Perhaps through getting distros who need to support GNOME 2 to collaborate together effectively, some of these questions about the future of the GNOME panel, applets, etc. can be worked out. Is it simpler to maintain extra modules than to scale mutter and gnome-shell down? define scale down. if your definition of scale down implies do not use hardware acceleration then the answer is obviously no. that's the whole point. the whole graphics stack (cairo, x11, gtk) is trying to be as hardware accelerated - it's not a new thing. the scaled down version of mutter is metacity with the default, xrender-based, compositor; but mutter is just providing the window management infrastructure for gnome-shell - and you simply cannot implement the gnome-shell designs using a non-hardware accelerated environment. It is obviously not possible to provide OpenGL-based animations when OpenGL is not available. However, I would think that it could be possible to create a GTK3 based user interface that provides the basic functionalities of GNOME shell without the animations. Such an interface could be designed to resemble GNOME shell more than the existing GNOME 2.x panel even if it does not provide as rich of an experience. So I disagree with your assessment that you simply cannot implement the gnome-shell designs using a non-hardware accelerated environment. If someone has the motivation to try, I think they should not be discouraged. Though, as you seem to suggest, it might not be worth the effort. It perhaps does make good sense to just use the existing GNOME panel and mutter for users who need a scaled down experience. While it may not be possible to have the GNOME 3 GNOME Shell experience and the classic GNOME experience working together today, I suspect that the technical issues will be worked out if there is a real need to provide ongoing support for both together. For example, if there is a need to maintain the old GNOME panel and metacity so it only supports D-Bus based applets or works with new GSettings infrastructure, it could be done. Perhaps a GNOME 2.34 release might be something to consider at some point if there is enough interest to continue working on GNOME 2.x to make it inter-operate better with GNOME 3, for example. A lot of these sorts of decisions, though, cannot really be made until it is more clear how much ongoing investment will be made in GNOME 2.x. But perhaps the GNOME community could do more now to make sure that all options are open for consideration and by being more accommodating to discussion. Things may seem impossible now simply since it is not clear how such efforts will be resourced, but this could easily change as GNOME evolves and if there is a real need. Brian ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi Brian! Am Donnerstag, den 30.12.2010, 13:03 -0600 schrieb Brian Cameron: For example, I have concerns about how GNOME 2.x is going to be maintained in the long run, and I think a lot of issues raised in this discussion relate to such concerns. To me, it seems that GNOME 2.32 and later 2.x releases were developed as transitional releases moving towards GNOME 3 without a clear roadmap for how GNOME 2 will be supported long-term. To me it is not clear whether those who intend to deliver GNOME 2.x-based solutions should ship GNOME 2.30, 2.32, some random mismash of module versions that you are able to get working, or what. It also is not clear what role(s) the GNOME community will play in helping different distros who ship and support GNOME 2 to work together and collaborate in that effort. GNOME 2.x will not get any more official support after the 2.32.1 relase which already happened. Single module maintainers may decide (or have already decided/done) to do more 2.32.x release to fix various bugs but no more official releases are planned. This is not different from GNOME 2.30 for example. Distros that ship GNOME 2.30 (Ubuntu LTR for example) basically need to care themselves if they need to backport patches from newer releases of fix things themselves if it is specific to this GNOME release. GNOME never gave a promise to support any release any longer than 6 months. Despite that and this is what this thread is about, GNOME will maintain a non-3D user-experience in the future which will likely use some components of the GNOME 2.x stack but ported to GNOME 3 technologies (no parallel installation required). Until now, this experience seems to end up as metacity + gnome-panel + Applications. This is not a continuation of GNOME 2.x even if a lot of code might be shared. Answering parts of your questions: Distros should ship GNOME 2.32.1 if they really want to continue shipping GNOME 2. Regards, Johannes ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Johannes: GNOME 2.x will not get any more official support after the 2.32.1 relase which already happened. Single module maintainers may decide (or have already decided/done) to do more 2.32.x release to fix various bugs but no more official releases are planned. This is not different from GNOME 2.30 for example. Distros that ship GNOME 2.30 (Ubuntu LTR for example) basically need to care themselves if they need to backport patches from newer releases of fix things themselves if it is specific to this GNOME release. GNOME never gave a promise to support any release any longer than 6 months. Yes, I understand that is the current plan. I was only trying to suggest that plans could change if the community determines a real need and if distros working together help to provide whatever resources would be necessary. Despite that and this is what this thread is about, GNOME will maintain a non-3D user-experience in the future which will likely use some components of the GNOME 2.x stack but ported to GNOME 3 technologies (no parallel installation required). Until now, this experience seems to end up as metacity + gnome-panel + Applications. This is not a continuation of GNOME 2.x even if a lot of code might be shared. As you say, this is likely what will happen and the current plan. However, as you imply by saying likely it is hard to predict the future. At the very least, I see no harm in discussing options. This tendency to assert that plans cannot change seems to stifle discussion. Answering parts of your questions: Distros should ship GNOME 2.32.1 if they really want to continue shipping GNOME 2. I do not think it is so much about distros really wanting to ship GNOME 2. It is more a fact that many distros currently deliver, or will soon deliver, supported versions of GNOME 2. Regardless of whether the GNOME community provides any more official support after 2.32.1, distros will continue to support their supported products. Distros could work together in these efforts. I see no reason why such collaboration could not happen within the GNOME community. Though, since you seem to suggest that the GNOME community has already decided that there will be no further support, I guess you may be saying that such efforts would necessarily have to happen outside of the GNOME community (whatever that means in a free software community). To me it seems odd to make such final decisions before determining if there is any real interest, need, or if distros might be willing to make resources available to make such efforts happen. These are all variables that probably will not be known until distros seriously consider making the transition to supporting GNOME 3, which could be many years away for some distros. Brian ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
El jue, 30-12-2010 a las 22:34 +0100, Johannes Schmid escribió: Despite that and this is what this thread is about, GNOME will maintain a non-3D user-experience in the future which will likely use some components of the GNOME 2.x stack but ported to GNOME 3 technologies (no parallel installation required). Until now, this experience seems to end up as metacity + gnome-panel + Applications. This is not a continuation of GNOME 2.x even if a lot of code might be shared. This is great and enough, for me at least. Thanks for clarifying things :-D signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 22:18:19 +0100 2010: On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 05:53:35PM +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote: Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 17:25:31 +0100 2010: Are you talking about the 3.0 version? I'd expect bonobo to be dropped for a 3.0 panel. I'm talking about gnome panel from git master, vuntz added support for bonobo applets to make the transition easier. Anyway, we need vuntz for the real answer. I'm not sure, but I think the idea was dropping bonobo support when most of applets are ported to dbus. Also for 2.x? For 3.0 I don't expect anything other than no bonobo, as bonobo is deprecated and we're dropping all deprecated stuff. There's no gnome-panel 3. My only wonder is regarding gnome-panel + applets being the fallback option.. so maybe somehow different rules apply. -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x523E6462 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 16:53 +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos a écrit : Is the GNOME 3 panel compatible with the GNOME 2 applets? There's no gnome 3 panel, gnome-panel hasn't been ported to gtk3 yet, there's a branch but it's outdated and it still doesn't work. That’s good then. But does this panel work fine with the GNOME 3 components? Especially the new control-center ? -- .''`. : :' : “You would need to ask a lawyer if you don't know `. `' that a handshake of course makes a valid contract.” `--- J???rg Schilling ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Excerpts from Emmanuele Bassi's message of mar dic 28 23:47:29 +0100 2010: On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 23:07 +0100, Luca Ferretti wrote: Il giorno mar, 28/12/2010 alle 16.50 +, Emmanuele Bassi ha scritto: On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 13:42 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward no problem with that. you can maintain the old user experience for yourself and never upgrade. and snarkyness is never going to get you anything, mmkay? (cit.) :P it wasn't at all meant to be snarky[0], nor was I sarcastic in any way, shape or form. it is, in fact, an exact assessment of what anyone who wishes to keep the old user experience should do: there's no need to ever upgrade if the 2.x UX is doing the job. My only concern is people who *can't* use gnome-shell because of hardware requirements, and it isn't a matter of buying a new computer, my previous laptop was a modern one, but the nvidia card made imposssible to use gnome-shell for more than 5 minutes. So, my point is, if we want to provide a fallback for those people and we are going to use gnome-panel and metacity because they are already there, why not keeping the applets too for the same reason? If I couldn't use gnome-shell, I would still want to upgrade all other modules to 3.0 and use a fallback mode without loosing the weather applet, for example. +++ by the way, this whole thread is pretty angry and confrontational - or, at least, it feels a lot that way. the 3.x UX is not complete, and will probably take some development cycles to iterate over the various ideas that are being experimented; I think it's been implied many times, since we all know that the 2.x UX took years to reach the point where we had to chuck a lot of it away to make room for something that was designed from the ground up, instead of the result of convergent bumping around of ideas. I don't think anyone in the Shell team or in the gnome-design team has stopped taking into consideration new ideas - though, obviously, they have to balance that with the resources being what they are. this whole thread, like the *many* others that preceded it, has been fairly aggressive in the pushback of the new design - it doesn't implement that pet feature, it requires hardware capabilities that not every one is willing to commit to, etc. - and while on one side my initial reaction was to say: well, tough - here's a nickel kid, go buy yourself a better computer; and if you want to keep using gnome2 feel free to maintain the pieces you require; and if you don't want to, then there's the door: don't let the it kick you in the ass too hard on your way out; but that was just my initial reaction, and I'm *really* trying (and willing) to tune that down. might be that the old age is finally catching up on me. I understand the pushback to changes. I understand that something that was designed from the ground up is still missing some feature. I understand that that design calls for some drastic changes in how the user experience should be shaped, which means that some features will not be implemented. these are choices made by people that generally know what they are doing, and that have been trusted for years by the whole community of people that show up in GNOME. I'm pretty sure they haven't been replaced by pod people. I guess the same measure of trust should be still applied, even if we don't immediately see the endgame. if that measure of trust cannot, or will not, be applied then we can give up creating a coherent Operating System, and we can go back maintaining separate pieces of an OS, with small time collaboration between projects, and design deferred to drive-by ad horizontal patching done by heroes trying to drain the swamp. ciao, Emmanuele. [0] unlike the time when I replied to you with the phrase you quoted. -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x523E6462 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 12:43 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos carlo...@gnome.org wrote: If I couldn't use gnome-shell, I would still want to upgrade all other modules to 3.0 and use a fallback mode without loosing the weather applet, for example. The standard answer here seems to be: -- You may lose features in 3.0 *with* gnome-shell, and you may lose even more features in 3.0 *without* gnome-shell. These features will take time to return in 3.2, 3.4, etc. Folks who don't want to lose features like this should hold off on upgrading. -- This is paraphrasing what I've read from Jon McCann and others, hopefully without putting words in their mouths, and makes sense to me. It would be nice to see an official statement like this from the release team if it's accurate. Sandy ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 09:43 +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote: it is, in fact, an exact assessment of what anyone who wishes to keep the old user experience should do: there's no need to ever upgrade if the 2.x UX is doing the job. My only concern is people who *can't* use gnome-shell because of hardware requirements, and it isn't a matter of buying a new computer, my previous laptop was a modern one, but the nvidia card made imposssible to use gnome-shell for more than 5 minutes. that is a driver bug; let's not conflate bugs with design choices. bugs gets fixed, eventually; in this case you're blocked by the fact that the driver in question is closed source, and the open source replacement for it is not yet mature enough. it is still, though, a driver bug. nvidia also used to have problem with xrender, making cairo (and gtk) slower - and yet nobody asked for a fallback drawing code path for gtk at the time. So, my point is, if we want to provide a fallback for those people and we are going to use gnome-panel and metacity because they are already there, why not keeping the applets too for the same reason? because resources are limited, and we cannot spread them evenly to all efforts otherwise GNOME 3.0 would never be released. if you are volunteering for porting gnome-panel and the applets to gtk3 and to the GNOME 3.x platform, then feel free to start filing patches; I'm pretty patches to port won't be rejected. gtk3 is entering its API/feature freeze phase, so it should be easier. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
El mié, 29-12-2010 a las 10:05 +, Emmanuele Bassi escribió: On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 09:43 +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote: it is, in fact, an exact assessment of what anyone who wishes to keep the old user experience should do: there's no need to ever upgrade if the 2.x UX is doing the job. My only concern is people who *can't* use gnome-shell because of hardware requirements, and it isn't a matter of buying a new computer, my previous laptop was a modern one, but the nvidia card made imposssible to use gnome-shell for more than 5 minutes. that is a driver bug; let's not conflate bugs with design choices. bugs gets fixed, eventually; in this case you're blocked by the fact that the driver in question is closed source, and the open source replacement for it is not yet mature enough. it is still, though, a driver bug. This is not only affecting to some nvidia users, for example in my case, my father actively uses a PentiumIV with an ATI 9200 card and its 3D support was always... well, slow and very unstable. We are able to get some games like extreme-tuxracer or gl117 running (even torcs is so much for that and loses a lot of frames). But trying to run compiz or metacity with compositing enabled always lead to X crashing. Support for that ATI 9200 was always horrible, even knowing the efforts done, it is still behaving poorly with xf86-video-ati-6.13.1 The same occurred for me on a Dell Optiplex 360 that has an integrated Intel card, my tries for having stable 3D support for it failed (this occurred at mid 2009) and I finally opted for using a nVidia 9300 GE with propietary drivers that, with my experience, are the only one that caused me no problems for having a proper 3D support (and lead me to always try to have a nvidia card) nvidia also used to have problem with xrender, making cairo (and gtk) slower - and yet nobody asked for a fallback drawing code path for gtk at the time. So, my point is, if we want to provide a fallback for those people and we are going to use gnome-panel and metacity because they are already there, why not keeping the applets too for the same reason? because resources are limited, and we cannot spread them evenly to all efforts otherwise GNOME 3.0 would never be released. if you are volunteering for porting gnome-panel and the applets to gtk3 and to the GNOME 3.x platform, then feel free to start filing patches; I'm pretty patches to port won't be rejected. gtk3 is entering its API/feature freeze phase, so it should be easier. ciao, Emmanuele. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 15:19 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: It will be important to get people writing extensions before the release happens i think. (sorry went into marketing mode...!) I take the liberty of saying that as person who tried to write an extension (some time ago): - Lack of basic documentation. Reverse engineering C/JavaScript to write an extension (for example - how to use St) is very hard. - Lack of basic tutorials. There no Hello World tutorial, video or anything (at least linked from page). [I distinguish between step-by-step tutorial and detailed documentation] - High overhead of code - if I remember correctly adding button requires adding to 2 files (CSS and JS) - where button should be put/how it behaves and how does it look like. Other technologies (gtk+ + gtkbuilder, html+css+js) allows to work on the scaffolding first and then work on details. Possibly 'sane' defaults and primitives would help. - Lack of sandboxing. I'm not quite sure if and how it can be done but last time error crashed whole shell. Since JavaScript gives dellittle/delinsno/ins compile-time checks and errors do happen it would be helpful. Regards signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Le mercredi 29 décembre 2010 à 00:54 -0800, Sandy Armstrong a écrit : You may lose features in 3.0 *with* gnome-shell, and you may lose even more features in 3.0 *without* gnome-shell. These features will take time to return in 3.2, 3.4, etc. Folks who don't want to lose features like this should hold off on upgrading. This answer is perfectly valid for those who compile their GNOME desktop by hand. For other people, it just moves the problem to the distributor. So, as a distribution packager, my question is: is it possible to package GNOME 3 components without breaking the GNOME 2 experience? If upgrading other major components to GNOME 3 breaks panel+metacity, we are left with few choices. 1. Packaging two versions of each component. Someone tried for the GNOME 1.2 → 2.0 transition, and this eventually failed miserably. 2. Dropping panel+metacity. Not going to happen for at least a release cycle. 3. Not packaging GNOME 3 for a while. Not what our users are expecting. So, if by upgrading g-c-c, g-s-d, g-session and other major components to 3.0, we are going to break g-panel, I’d like to know that now, not when it is too late and 3.0 has already been released. -- .''`. : :' : “You would need to ask a lawyer if you don't know `. `' that a handshake of course makes a valid contract.” `--- J???rg Schilling ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi! So, if by upgrading g-c-c, g-s-d, g-session and other major components to 3.0, we are going to break g-panel, I’d like to know that now, not when it is too late and 3.0 has already been released. The gnome-panel shipped in fallback mode will/should work with GNOME 3 components. That's why it is called fallback mode. Regards, Johannes ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Xan Lopez x...@gnome.org wrote: On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Luca Ferretti lferr...@gnome.org wrote: Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward no problem with that. you can maintain the old user experience for yourself and never upgrade. and snarkyness is never going to get you anything, mmkay? (cit.) I believe it was a pretty reasonable answer considering the persistent angry tone of all the previous emails. You reap what you sow, and all that. Well I think one can feel a little frustrated hence the angry tone if there is a perception that there is no place for people who don't have the capabilities to run gnome 3.0 is. You'll only see more of this later. It's best to have a solid message on who can and cannot use Gnome 3.0 ahead of the release. sri ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Le mercredi 29 décembre 2010, à 09:34 +0100, Josselin Mouette a écrit : Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 16:53 +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos a écrit : Is the GNOME 3 panel compatible with the GNOME 2 applets? There's no gnome 3 panel, gnome-panel hasn't been ported to gtk3 yet, there's a branch but it's outdated and it still doesn't work. That’s good then. But does this panel work fine with the GNOME 3 components? Especially the new control-center ? That work hasn't been done yet, but it shouldn't be a big deal to make it work with the new control center. To answer other gnome-panel GNOME 3 questions in this thread: + I want to have gnome-panel use gtk+ 3, yes. Patches welcome, since every time I try to secure time for this, I fail. + even if we move to gtk+ 3, there's no hard difficulty in maintaining bonobo compatibility for applets, as an external module to gnome-panel. We can simply take the compatibility module that exists today and move it out of process. I certainly do hope that this thread indicates that some people want to step up to do some active maintenance of gnome-panel ;-) Cheers, Vincent -- Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi Vincent, On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Vincent Untz vu...@gnome.org wrote: Le mardi 28 décembre 2010, à 15:20 +0100, Olav Vitters a écrit : However, the fallback is meant as a fallback, not as providing gnome-panel and its applets. So I don't see anything wrong with not providing the applets. While at the same time, I don't see anything wrong with releasing a new gnome-applets tarball. Meaning: GNOME 3 is not gnome-panel and never will be. But if someone still hacks on gnome-applets nobody will work against them. FWIW, I personally don't like calling this fallback and that's why I named it Classic GNOME in gnome-session. Ah, so that may be the source of this particular confusion. I think we should fix that. Sure, it's not our priority nor target, in terms of development (and it shouldn't be). But to a lot of people, fallback means you'll get some ugly stuff that barely works, and while I do think we want to push people to use GNOME Shell, there's no reason to make users who can't use it feel second-class GNOME users. It is second class I don't think there is any point in whitewashing it. Whether or not you get something that barely works has everything to do with how much attention it gets in design, development, and testing. If you want to use something for a fallback that won't really get any of those three it had better be simple as hell. And ban any complexity that does not provide essential functionality. It is also important to indicate to the user that the fallback is not normal. Due to some kind of failure they are receiving a sub-optimal experience. That is incompatible with the design goals of something that would have equivalence to the default. Again, our message should be simple: if you don't have hardware that will work - don't upgrade. Ideally, OS installers should be able to provide a crystal clear indication to the user (probably by actually trying to run a similar shell). Or rather, ideally we'd design or certify hardware. Using gnome-panel+metacity as a fallback is not incompatible with having gnome-panel+metacity offer a usable desktop. There are people who care about this mode, and it's up to those people to step up to make sure it will be usable. I don't think that is right. I don't think we can simultaneously design the fallback experience to be consistent with and minimize the differences from the default and keep it an entirely distinct and classic/traditional mode. If someone wants to fork off and continue to maintain a GNOME 2-like experience they are certainly free to do that but I am strongly against calling it GNOME. As we can see in this thread we already have enough confusion about what GNOME 3 is and will be. Adding to it seems like a really bad idea to me. That simple JS based fallback panel/menubar idea is sounding better and better... anyone want to give it a shot? Jon ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
That's not realistic. Distributions won't allow people to choose between GNOME 2 and 3, which means people will be forced to stick to releases That depends on the distribution providing they can be parallel installed, and on what the volunteers involved or staff paid to work on them want to do. After the KDE4.0 debacle I suspect some of those who still ship it are not going to be too keen to jump to GNOME 3 by default before everything is ready and supporting it. It's OK if we lose a few weird applets, but not if gnome-panel loses significant features people will miss badly. See KDE 4.0 for a rather brutal history lesson. Alan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.comwrote: On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 15:19 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: It will be important to get people writing extensions before the release happens i think. (sorry went into marketing mode...!) I take the liberty of saying that as person who tried to write an extension (some time ago): - Lack of basic documentation. Reverse engineering C/JavaScript to write an extension (for example - how to use St) is very hard. The Gnome shell guys only have limited resources. Owen and Jon are more than happy to help if someone wants to volunteer to do them. But their focus is on getting shell feature complete for the first release. Having done some of the work, it would be great to document what you've done thus far and then consult Jon and Owen on the limitations like reverse engineering. I know for a fact that a lot of components still haven't gotten the inspection work on it and they are looking for volunteers for that as well. Some are pretty easy others take some work. - Lack of basic tutorials. There no Hello World tutorial, video or anything (at least linked from page). [I distinguish between step-by-step tutorial and detailed documentation] Yes, we do need to have that before 3.0. This would in fact be a great article on Gnome Journal if someone wants to help writing that for fun and glory. - High overhead of code - if I remember correctly adding button requires adding to 2 files (CSS and JS) - where button should be put/how it behaves and how does it look like. Other technologies (gtk+ + gtkbuilder, html+css+js) allows to work on the scaffolding first and then work on details. Possibly 'sane' defaults and primitives would help. We probably want to move this to gnome-shell mailing list. - Lack of sandboxing. I'm not quite sure if and how it can be done but last time error crashed whole shell. Since JavaScript gives dellittle/delinsno/ins compile-time checks and errors do happen it would be helpful. Yeah, we probably want to move this over as well. It doesn't particularly address the current topic in regards to fallback to Gnome classic. sri ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Wed, 2010-12-29 at 13:41 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 15:19 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: It will be important to get people writing extensions before the release happens i think. (sorry went into marketing mode...!) I take the liberty of saying that as person who tried to write an extension (some time ago): - Lack of basic documentation. Reverse engineering C/JavaScript to write an extension (for example - how to use St) is very hard. The Gnome shell guys only have limited resources. Owen and Jon are more than happy to help if someone wants to volunteer to do them. But their focus is on getting shell feature complete for the first release. Having done some of the work, it would be great to document what you've done thus far and then consult Jon and Owen on the limitations like reverse engineering. I know for a fact that a lot of components still haven't gotten the inspection work on it and they are looking for volunteers for that as well. Some are pretty easy others take some work. I'm sorry if I sound accusing of something. I wanted to point out what I found to be biggest limitation of writing extensions to gnome-shell. I gave up very quickly due to time limitations - I had done none work at all (except displaying label Hello World on LHS of screen). At this moment I have way more projects then time not mentioning the 'real life obligations'. Probably many of the documentation would be shared among 'core' shell and the extensions so it might help getting volunteers as well. - Lack of sandboxing. I'm not quite sure if and how it can be done but last time error crashed whole shell. Since JavaScript gives dellittle/delinsno/ins compile-time checks and errors do happen it would be helpful. Yeah, we probably want to move this over as well. It doesn't particularly address the current topic in regards to fallback to Gnome classic. sri Sorry for posting it but I wanted to point out the problems person unfamiliar with toolkit/platform finds on initial stages of extension development which seems to be crucial to 'get people writing extensions before the release'. Regards PS. While I have my concerns regarding gnome-shell I find it easier to use after some time then classical Gnome - so I'm sorry if I'm over-critical. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 2:22 PM, Maciej Piechotka uzytkown...@gmail.comwrote: I'm sorry if I sound accusing of something. I wanted to point out what I found to be biggest limitation of writing extensions to gnome-shell. I gave up very quickly due to time limitations - I had done none work at all (except displaying label Hello World on LHS of screen). At this moment I have way more projects then time not mentioning the 'real life obligations'. Don't let the work go to waste! :-) Please document. Completely understand the real life obligations. Sorry for posting it but I wanted to point out the problems person unfamiliar with toolkit/platform finds on initial stages of extension development which seems to be crucial to 'get people writing extensions before the release'. Nothing to apologize for. It's good to know, please do comment on gnome-shell though. PS. While I have my concerns regarding gnome-shell I find it easier to use after some time then classical Gnome - so I'm sorry if I'm over-critical. That's great to hear.. I find it that way as well. I don't think your comments were particularly critical, the fact that you went through the trouble of trying is great. sri ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 09:50:10PM +0100, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote: It's OK if we lose a few weird applets, but not if gnome-panel loses significant features people will miss badly. Totally disagree when it is meant to be called anything other than 'fallback'. Fallback is clear: unsupported, not perfect 'Classic GNOME', but then not having applets is a broken promise. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Don't think there is 3d on ppc. There is. I have it on Power G5. I think the fact that GNOME kills gnome-applets make GNOME2 compatibility mode a bad joke (if not hypocrisy). A good number of people would like to use that mode (I run voting some while ago at linux.org.ru - can provide url if someone interested) - and GNOME is going to provide them with just crooks, not a real solution. I am sure one of the most important reasons people choose GNOME2 compatibility mode is the applets (I guess noone thinks that gnome-panel itself is so attractive that people cannot live without it). To be honest, not them, us - because personally I am going to stay in that mode as long as possible, so I really would like to have it working. IIRC for a moment, gnome-shell does not provide extension architecture, similar to applets - so if a person wants something custom (not notification, not status) - where would he go? About gnome-shell compatibility. I tried to run gnome-shell inside vmware workstation. No way. There is no 3d there. Sergey ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On 28 December 2010 12:53, Sergey Udaltsov sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote: I think the fact that GNOME kills gnome-applets make GNOME2 compatibility mode a bad joke (if not hypocrisy). A good number of people would like to use that mode (I run voting some while ago at linux.org.ru - can provide url if someone interested) - and GNOME is going to provide them with just crooks, not a real solution. I am sure one of the most important reasons people choose GNOME2 compatibility mode is the applets (I guess noone thinks that gnome-panel itself is so attractive that people cannot live without it). To be honest, not them, us - because personally I am going to stay in that mode as long as possible, so I really would like to have it working. What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. Rui ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. So, why bother maintaining gnome2 support mode at all? go to hell, just do not upgrade is unbeatable argument, I must admit. Actually, your advice effectively stops people from upgrading their distros, unless the distro choses to support both gnome2 and gnome3 - which I'm afraid will not be the case for most of them. To be fair, gnome2+3 maintenance may be not trivial, at least GNOME does not bother separating binaries by name. Sergey ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Excerpts from Rui Tiago Cação Matos's message of mar dic 28 14:02:55 +0100 2010: On 28 December 2010 12:53, Sergey Udaltsov sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote: I think the fact that GNOME kills gnome-applets make GNOME2 compatibility mode a bad joke (if not hypocrisy). A good number of people would like to use that mode (I run voting some while ago at linux.org.ru - can provide url if someone interested) - and GNOME is going to provide them with just crooks, not a real solution. I am sure one of the most important reasons people choose GNOME2 compatibility mode is the applets (I guess noone thinks that gnome-panel itself is so attractive that people cannot live without it). To be honest, not them, us - because personally I am going to stay in that mode as long as possible, so I really would like to have it working. What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. I don't think gnome 3 is just gnome-shell. There a lot of more changes in other modules, specially in the platform, that make the upgrade worth it. Rui -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x523E6462 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi! Am Dienstag, den 28.12.2010, 13:09 + schrieb Sergey Udaltsov: Actually, your advice effectively stops people from upgrading their distros, unless the distro choses to support both gnome2 and gnome3 - which I'm afraid will not be the case for most of them. To be fair, gnome2+3 maintenance may be not trivial, at least GNOME does not bother separating binaries by name. As pointed out before the fallback-mode is not a continuation of GNOME 2. It was just the easiest way to create a fallback because we don't have the resources to create a non-3D shell that could act as a fallback. As we have gnome-panel already it was choosen as the fallback mode. BTW, nobody forbids you to create a gnome-sergeys-applets module that is compatible with the GNOME3 gnome-panel and ships all the applets you want. But it will just not be part of the default moduleset. Regards, Johannes ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
As pointed out before the fallback-mode is not a continuation of GNOME 2. It was just the easiest way to create a fallback because we don't have the resources to create a non-3D shell that could act as a fallback. As we have gnome-panel already it was choosen as the fallback mode. Is it an indication of a problem in gnome3 architecture? Is it simpler to maintain extra modules than to scale mutter and gnome-shell down? Especially considering that fallback mode would be somewhat weak, functionally BTW, nobody forbids you to create a gnome-sergeys-applets module that is compatible with the GNOME3 gnome-panel and ships all the applets you want. But it will just not be part of the default moduleset. Sure, but that policy is not friendly to existing users. Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit : What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. Is the GNOME 3 panel compatible with the GNOME 2 applets? If so, that’s fine. We distributors can keep on shipping gnome-applets as we do today, with the 2.32 version. If not, you’ve effectively just killed the panel. There’s no way we can maintain two versions of the panel, requiring two versions of g-c-c, themselves requiring two versions of g-s-d. -- .''`. : :' : “You would need to ask a lawyer if you don't know `. `' that a handshake of course makes a valid contract.” `--- J???rg Schilling ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
It seems, there are, in theory, 5 options for fallback/compatibility: 1. Make g-s and mutter scalable down to envs without 3d 2. Provide full compat/fallback mode, with panel and applets 3. Provide restricted fallback mode, only gnome-panel, just enough to do smth 4. Same as #3, just very basic and simple panel, as William mentioned 5. No fallback at all. Anything I missed? Was that choice discussed anywhere? Sergey ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Excerpts from Josselin Mouette's message of mar dic 28 15:03:45 +0100 2010: Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit : What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. Is the GNOME 3 panel compatible with the GNOME 2 applets? There's no gnome 3 panel, gnome-panel hasn't been ported to gtk3 yet, there's a branch but it's outdated and it still doesn't work. If so, that’s fine. We distributors can keep on shipping gnome-applets as we do today, with the 2.32 version. If not, you’ve effectively just killed the panel. There’s no way we can maintain two versions of the panel, requiring two versions of g-c-c, themselves requiring two versions of g-s-d. -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x523E6462 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 15:20:05 +0100 2010: On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit : What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. Is the GNOME 3 panel compatible with the GNOME 2 applets? Only with dbus applets, AFAIK (and hope). gnome-panel currently supports both dbus and bonobo applets. IIRC some work is needed on gnome-applets to port them properly to latest gtk+ (and so on). If someone bothers (I'm guessing between GNOME 3.0 and 3.2), I don't see any reason not to release a new tarball with those changes. Whether or not that is supported doesn't really matter. However, the fallback is meant as a fallback, not as providing gnome-panel and its applets. So I don't see anything wrong with not providing the applets. While at the same time, I don't see anything wrong with releasing a new gnome-applets tarball. Meaning: GNOME 3 is not gnome-panel and never will be. But if someone still hacks on gnome-applets nobody will work against them. I do hope at one point we won't need the gnome-panel fallback (quick enough software rendering or some other experience). That said, think it would be good to provide a gnome-applets which works with gtk+ 3.0. -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x523E6462 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 04:54:43PM +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote: Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 15:20:05 +0100 2010: On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit : What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. Is the GNOME 3 panel compatible with the GNOME 2 applets? Only with dbus applets, AFAIK (and hope). gnome-panel currently supports both dbus and bonobo applets. Are you talking about the 3.0 version? I'd expect bonobo to be dropped for a 3.0 panel. Anyway, we need vuntz for the real answer. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 13:42 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: As pointed out before the fallback-mode is not a continuation of GNOME 2. It was just the easiest way to create a fallback because we don't have the resources to create a non-3D shell that could act as a fallback. As we have gnome-panel already it was choosen as the fallback mode. Is it an indication of a problem in gnome3 architecture? I don't see any problem here. Is it simpler to maintain extra modules than to scale mutter and gnome-shell down? define scale down. if your definition of scale down implies do not use hardware acceleration then the answer is obviously no. that's the whole point. the whole graphics stack (cairo, x11, gtk) is trying to be as hardware accelerated - it's not a new thing. the scaled down version of mutter is metacity with the default, xrender-based, compositor; but mutter is just providing the window management infrastructure for gnome-shell - and you simply cannot implement the gnome-shell designs using a non-hardware accelerated environment. Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward no problem with that. you can maintain the old user experience for yourself and never upgrade. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 17:25:31 +0100 2010: On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 04:54:43PM +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote: Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 15:20:05 +0100 2010: On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit : What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. Is the GNOME 3 panel compatible with the GNOME 2 applets? Only with dbus applets, AFAIK (and hope). gnome-panel currently supports both dbus and bonobo applets. Are you talking about the 3.0 version? I'd expect bonobo to be dropped for a 3.0 panel. I'm talking about gnome panel from git master, vuntz added support for bonobo applets to make the transition easier. Anyway, we need vuntz for the real answer. I'm not sure, but I think the idea was dropping bonobo support when most of applets are ported to dbus. -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x523E6462 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 05:53:35PM +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote: Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 17:25:31 +0100 2010: Are you talking about the 3.0 version? I'd expect bonobo to be dropped for a 3.0 panel. I'm talking about gnome panel from git master, vuntz added support for bonobo applets to make the transition easier. Anyway, we need vuntz for the real answer. I'm not sure, but I think the idea was dropping bonobo support when most of applets are ported to dbus. Also for 2.x? For 3.0 I don't expect anything other than no bonobo, as bonobo is deprecated and we're dropping all deprecated stuff. My only wonder is regarding gnome-panel + applets being the fallback option.. so maybe somehow different rules apply. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:18:19PM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: Also for 2.x? For 3.0 I don't expect anything other than no bonobo, as bonobo is deprecated and we're dropping all deprecated stuff. My only wonder is regarding gnome-panel + applets being the fallback option.. so 'applets' officially only gnome-panel maybe somehow different rules apply. -- Regards, Olav ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Il giorno mar, 28/12/2010 alle 16.50 +, Emmanuele Bassi ha scritto: On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 13:42 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward no problem with that. you can maintain the old user experience for yourself and never upgrade. and snarkyness is never going to get you anything, mmkay? (cit.) :P ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Luca Ferretti lferr...@gnome.org wrote: Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward no problem with that. you can maintain the old user experience for yourself and never upgrade. and snarkyness is never going to get you anything, mmkay? (cit.) I believe it was a pretty reasonable answer considering the persistent angry tone of all the previous emails. You reap what you sow, and all that. Xan :P ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 23:07 +0100, Luca Ferretti wrote: Il giorno mar, 28/12/2010 alle 16.50 +, Emmanuele Bassi ha scritto: On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 13:42 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward no problem with that. you can maintain the old user experience for yourself and never upgrade. and snarkyness is never going to get you anything, mmkay? (cit.) :P it wasn't at all meant to be snarky[0], nor was I sarcastic in any way, shape or form. it is, in fact, an exact assessment of what anyone who wishes to keep the old user experience should do: there's no need to ever upgrade if the 2.x UX is doing the job. +++ by the way, this whole thread is pretty angry and confrontational - or, at least, it feels a lot that way. the 3.x UX is not complete, and will probably take some development cycles to iterate over the various ideas that are being experimented; I think it's been implied many times, since we all know that the 2.x UX took years to reach the point where we had to chuck a lot of it away to make room for something that was designed from the ground up, instead of the result of convergent bumping around of ideas. I don't think anyone in the Shell team or in the gnome-design team has stopped taking into consideration new ideas - though, obviously, they have to balance that with the resources being what they are. this whole thread, like the *many* others that preceded it, has been fairly aggressive in the pushback of the new design - it doesn't implement that pet feature, it requires hardware capabilities that not every one is willing to commit to, etc. - and while on one side my initial reaction was to say: well, tough - here's a nickel kid, go buy yourself a better computer; and if you want to keep using gnome2 feel free to maintain the pieces you require; and if you don't want to, then there's the door: don't let the it kick you in the ass too hard on your way out; but that was just my initial reaction, and I'm *really* trying (and willing) to tune that down. might be that the old age is finally catching up on me. I understand the pushback to changes. I understand that something that was designed from the ground up is still missing some feature. I understand that that design calls for some drastic changes in how the user experience should be shaped, which means that some features will not be implemented. these are choices made by people that generally know what they are doing, and that have been trusted for years by the whole community of people that show up in GNOME. I'm pretty sure they haven't been replaced by pod people. I guess the same measure of trust should be still applied, even if we don't immediately see the endgame. if that measure of trust cannot, or will not, be applied then we can give up creating a coherent Operating System, and we can go back maintaining separate pieces of an OS, with small time collaboration between projects, and design deferred to drive-by ad horizontal patching done by heroes trying to drain the swamp. ciao, Emmanuele. [0] unlike the time when I replied to you with the phrase you quoted. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
2010/12/28 Sergey Udaltsov sergey.udalt...@gmail.com What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2 and there's no one preventing you from doing that. So, why bother maintaining gnome2 support mode at all? go to hell, just do not upgrade is unbeatable argument, I must admit. I think though it might be initially painful not having applets. But if you look at what applets are available they seem fairly repetitious. The exception for me personally is the system monitor applet which I think is very useful as apps do spin out of control or take a lot of memory. That can be addressed once libgtop is converted to gobject-introspection so we can get JavaScript bindings. But over next couple of releases after 3.0, we should be able to get people to start writing useful extensions to bridge gaps from the old applets to shell extensions. I think the lack of applets will be a little tricky to manage from a release perspective since there are clearly many people like yourself that are alarmed that such a functionality is being removed and it will be important to underline the context on why it is removed before things start taking a negative spin in media. It will be important to get people writing extensions before the release happens i think. (sorry went into marketing mode...!) Actually, your advice effectively stops people from upgrading their distros, unless the distro choses to support both gnome2 and gnome3 - which I'm afraid will not be the case for most of them. To be fair, gnome2+3 maintenance may be not trivial, at least GNOME does not bother separating binaries by name. I think in this case, if you don't meet the requirements that it might be better not to upgrade till Gnome 3 hits feature parity. I don't know what the world looks like these days in terms of computer capabilities. I don't want to see us alienate large swathes of our 3% desktop market share. :-) There should be some idea though on how to convert such users to gnome 3 at some point, and that might be something something as simply improving things so that they do work comfortably. I remember it took quite a while for nautilus to be where it is today. My two cents. sri ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 15:19 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: I don't want to see us alienate large swathes of our 3% desktop market share. :-) I think this is a myth that should be debunked. at least, I strongly believe that it *will* be debunked as soon as distributions start shipping GNOME 3.x. I don't believe for an *instant* that changing the UX will lead to alienating but the minimal part of our user base. the reason why I don't hold to that is that we will be losing users either way if we just stay with 2.x; users won't stay with us just because we never change the user experience from metacity + gnome-panel + a bunch of applets. users will go away sooner, as they always do when a project is perceived to be stagnating. so we can chose to change the user experience to something that might attract new users, and maybe lose a bit of some hard core and vocal minority in the process, or just stay the course, and never get new users, and eventually lose what we have. this risk-averse attitude is a clear indicator that we lost our edge - in development, design and other things. another thing that was pointed out by Xan on IRC earlier this evening and that captures my thoughts precisely: xan my impression is that people asked for years for the abstract idea of change and progress against the perceived decadence of gnome 2.x but when faced with the real-world consequences of doing large changes they completely reject it xan they just want to magically get from here to there without living the process we can't get from 2.32 to 3.0 without ever losing features, or even users; the whole point of re-designing the UX means losing something in order to gain something else - features contradicting the new design will just have to go away. if this means losing some users, well, so be it: the potential of attracting new users far outweighs it. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote: by the way, this whole thread is pretty angry and confrontational - or, at least, it feels a lot that way. It has. I think though as a project we're not quite managing this as well as we could. Not enough context for the changes we are making and we've always been kind of poor in communicating these things. When there is a lack of real information in the overall structure of what Gnome 3.0 means. So we have these discussions about applets going away in a vacuum without really explaining the underlying reasons why we are doing so. When we don't get the reasons then we get into these rat holes. I have the perception that information on what all is going on is getting lost in the noise. What is the canonical point where information on this stuff need to flow to? Seems to me you need to pick someone or maybe two to handle all the details, parse, and then communicate. the 3.x UX is not complete, and will probably take some development cycles to iterate over the various ideas that are being experimented; I Yep, that's what I alluded to in a previous message. Like some parts of Gnome 2.0 it took a while for things to stabilize. I expect the same. There is really nothing wrong saying stay on Gnome 2.0 till we reach a point of stability. this whole thread, like the *many* others that preceded it, has been fairly aggressive in the pushback of the new design - it doesn't implement that pet feature, it requires hardware capabilities that not every one is willing to commit to, etc. - and while on one side my initial reaction was to say: well, tough - here's a nickel kid, go buy yourself a better computer; and if you want to keep using gnome2 feel free to maintain the pieces you require; and if you don't want to, then there's the door: don't let the it kick you in the ass too hard on your way out; but that was just my initial reaction, and I'm *really* trying (and willing) to tune that down. might be that the old age is finally catching up on me. You old hacker you. :-) What you really need is a group of people between developers and community to explain this stuff, filter out the noise etc etc. I understand the pushback to changes. I understand that something that was designed from the ground up is still missing some feature. I understand that that design calls for some drastic changes in how the user experience should be shaped, which means that some features will not be implemented. these are choices made by people that generally know what they are doing, and that have been trusted for years by the whole community of people that show up in GNOME. I'm pretty sure they haven't been replaced by pod people. I guess the same measure of trust should be still applied, even if we don't immediately see the endgame. I think people just want to know what the final thing is going to look like. People are always scared that some pet features of there is going to disappear. We have this reputation of removing stuff and people get attached to the features tehy have. I am no exception to this. But what I've realized is that if you want those features, then you open up a bugzilla, and volunteer to help. So if you want system monitor again, you need to help get javascript bindings to gtop of bug people to do that and then ask what can I do? Resources are not infinite and people need to understand that if they want a particular feature at the initial release they need to jump in and help and not complain. If are not doing that, then what is missing that we be enabled to do this. sri ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi! Am Dienstag, den 28.12.2010, 15:44 -0800 schrieb Sriram Ramkrishna: I have the perception that information on what all is going on is getting lost in the noise. What is the canonical point where information on this stuff need to flow to? Seems to me you need to pick someone or maybe two to handle all the details, parse, and then communicate. I think there are few people that expect that everything will be explained to them which is not the case and won't ever be. For now, GNOME 3 is nothing the end-user should care about. Sometimes the question Why? will remain because design and even careful design is subject to personal preference. This question cannot always be answered though most of it should be covered somewhere. When we reach UI/feature freeze I am pretty sure a bunch of people will sit down and write detailed release notes that cover all the points that people need to know when updating. This information will be there when the release happens but cannot be there yet because there are a lot of things we currently cannot be sure about. The state of the 3D drivers might be one of them. Regards, Johannes ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
I generally agree with what you said, so I won't reply to every thing. On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 15:44 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote: by the way, this whole thread is pretty angry and confrontational - or, at least, it feels a lot that way. It has. I think though as a project we're not quite managing this as well as we could. Not enough context for the changes we are making and we've always been kind of poor in communicating these things. When there is a lack of real information in the overall structure of what Gnome 3.0 means. So we have these discussions about applets going away in a vacuum without really explaining the underlying reasons why we are doing so. When we don't get the reasons then we get into these rat holes. I don't want the release-team to justify every single decision they make; the release-team mailing list archives are public, and so are the release team IRC meetings, AFAIK. democracy^WGNOME is made by those who show up. I consider the release-team as the maintainers of GNOME as a project; I don't go questioning the decisions of a maintainer, unless I'm willing to put my ass on the line and come up with a better alternative. if we need a community manager -- somebody that proxies (both ways) the release team/module maintainers and the community -- then we should ask the Foundation to look into this matter. I think people just want to know what the final thing is going to look like. I understand that feeling, but there is no final thing: GNOME 2.x arrived at the dot-32 minor release, and it's still not done - the reason we're chucking away a bunch of stuff is precisely because it cannot be done in any other way (yes, it's true: it cannot be done in any other way; otherwise we'd be releasing GNOME 5.2 by now). the final thing is going to look slightly different in every cycle, because that's how GNOME 2.x started as well. I also don't want GNOME to be in the state where we can say that it's done, because that implies the death of the project. ciao, Emmanuele. -- W: http://www.emmanuelebassi.name B: http://blogs.gnome.org/ebassi ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Frederic Crozat f...@crozat.net wrote: for nvidia, gnome-shell is not usable with proprietary driver What do you mean by this? Every time I've tested on nvidia hardware with the proprietary driver, shell performance has been totally usable. It's not lightning fast, but I don't think any hardware change would fix that. Sandy ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
What do you mean by this? Every time I've tested on nvidia hardware with the proprietary driver, shell performance has been totally usable. It's not lightning fast, but I don't think any hardware change would fix that. Usable is a rather hard to quantify thing. Not lightning fast to some people (me included) for example is not particularly usable. For me it took until about Fedora 11/12 before even the compositing was efficient enough on intel video to leave it turned on without making gimp unpleasant to work with. Alan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Sandy Armstrong sanfordarmstr...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Frederic Crozat f...@crozat.net wrote: for nvidia, gnome-shell is not usable with proprietary driver What do you mean by this? Every time I've tested on nvidia hardware with the proprietary driver, shell performance has been totally usable. It's not lightning fast, but I don't think any hardware change would fix that. Here both nvidia binary and nouveau are usable to the point where you have 2-3 full-screen windows open. Then it starts to slow down exponentially with each window you keep open. I've tested this on GeForce 8600M GS and an older Quadro (can't give exact model as this computer is in my office). -- Patryk Zawadzki ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote: What do you mean by this? Every time I've tested on nvidia hardware with the proprietary driver, shell performance has been totally usable. It's not lightning fast, but I don't think any hardware change would fix that. Usable is a rather hard to quantify thing. Not lightning fast to some people (me included) for example is not particularly usable. For me it took until about Fedora 11/12 before even the compositing was efficient enough on intel video to leave it turned on without making gimp unpleasant to work with. I don't disagree. My point was merely that I was not aware of any performance issues unique to Nvidia hardware. I've seen gnome-shell on Intel and ATI hardware as well, and performance is essentially the same as on my Nvidia. Your response seems to confirm that to some degree. I thought maybe Frederic was referring to some specific bug that I'd be curious to learn more about. Sandy ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Le 27 déc. 2010 15:42, Sandy Armstrong sanfordarmstr...@gmail.com a écrit : On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 1:34 AM, Frederic Crozat f...@crozat.net wrote: for nvidia, gnome-shell is not usable with proprietary driver What do you mean by this? Every time I've tested on nvidia hardware with the proprietary driver, shell performance has been totally usable. It's not lightning fast, but I don't think any hardware change would fix that. When opening overview or notification tray, the entire display can become frozen for several seconds. iirc it is an issue caused by shaped windows. -- Frederic Crozat ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Le 25 déc. 2010 00:16, Johannes Schmid j...@jsschmid.de a écrit : Hi Dave! Do you have any figures on what percentage of Linux users will have the 3D capabilities necessary? Just wondering. Do you have statistics about what hardware people use with Linux? Than it is easy to find out. But all newer ( 5 years) Intel, AMD/ATI and NVidia chips work so that should make a big percentage on the market. This is incorrect : for nvidia, gnome-shell is not usable with proprietary driver and nouveau 3d support is still experimental (not supported by nouveau developers) and prone to gpu lockup (it is unusable on a daily basis, trust me). I can't comment on recent ati, I know r200 is unusable. * Samsung NC20 (Integrated on board Via graphics chip - no 3D - got this to run Moblin, didn't work, currently running Ubuntu 9.10) I don't think VIA has decent 3d drivers but I might be wrong. They still don't. * Dell Latitude D420 (Intel graphics, should work, but 3D stuff runs really slowly, currently running Ubuntu 9.10) Intel graphics works fast enough for the shell. I don't remember the minimum hardware requirement for intel chipset. -- Frédéric Crozat ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi Jon, On 12/24/2010 12:32 AM, William Jon McCann wrote: It is important to note that there is no such classic mode. There is a fallback mode for when 3D support is not available. Do you have any figures on what percentage of Linux users will have the 3D capabilities necessary? Just wondering. Here in the office at home, I have 6 computers running GNOME, and of those 6, I believe only 2 support accelerated 3D to an acceptable level. The 5 computers are: * Mac Mini PPC, running a quite old Ubuntu (no 3D) * Samsung NC20 (Integrated on board Via graphics chip - no 3D - got this to run Moblin, didn't work, currently running Ubuntu 9.10) * Dell Latitude D420 (Intel graphics, should work, but 3D stuff runs really slowly, currently running Ubuntu 9.10) * Dell Optiplex 360 (ATI chip, no 3D) * Dell Latitude E6500 (Intel chip again, 3D works fine, running Ubuntu 10.04) * Lenovo Ideapad, running MeeGo 1.1 (3D fine) I would like to be able to upgrade a distro some time in the next few years on at least some of these (the Mac Mini D420 are close to retirement, but the Optiplex will live on, as will the netbooks), and I would like to be sure that the desktop of my choice will provide a reasonable level of functionality. When you say there is no classic mode, only fallback, what I hear is fallback will be hobbled, but that's OK. Do I understand your position correctly? People who don't desire such changes are not obligated to make them. I'm all for change, but too far too fast just means you lose your feathers and plunge to your death in the Aegean sea. I ask about figures because if only 40% of our current users (the ones already passionate about GNOME) will be able to actually use GNOME 3, that is a PR disaster waiting to happen, and we need to be aware of it. Having a feature complete fallback seems like a good way to do that. Alternatively, perhaps we should be working with XFCE to make that our fallback, if we don't have the resources? Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Neary GNOME Foundation member dne...@gnome.org Jabber: nea...@gmail.com ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Excerpts from William Jon McCann's message of vie dic 24 00:32:40 +0100 2010: Hi Carlos, Hi, On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Carlos Garcia Campos carlo...@gnome.org wrote: Excerpts from Frederic Peters's message of jue dic 23 10:22:40 +0100 2010: Hi, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: I am confused, what's the story with gnome-panel and gnome-applets in 3.0? Are they in, are they out? If gnome 3 is to support gnome2 compat mode, both of these components should stay in for some while, right? Currently, the situation in in jhbuild is very strange: gnome-panel is still there, gnome-applets are gone. Is this planned? Who'd need the panel without the applets? I pointed this after the new modulesets were pushed, you can read the answer Jon gave here: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2010-December/msg4.html The relevant part: | - gnome-applets (even if we still have gnome-panel) | | RIP. Essential applets should be part of gnome-panel itself. It | doesn't make sense to have applets only in the gnome 2 fallback | experience. I disagree. If I run gnome-session with the classic mode I expect to see exactly what I have right now, with all the applets. The definition of essential applet is probably different for every user. GNOME 2 fallback experience should be gnome-panel, metacity and gnome-applets. It is important to note that there is no such classic mode. There is a fallback mode for when 3D support is not available. Then this is confusing: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-session/tree/data/classic-gnome.session.desktop.in.in note that to run the fallback you need something like $ gnome-session --session classic-gnome so I would suggest to rename it to fallback or whatever to avoid confusions, since what I expect from a classic session is what we have been using for years. The fact that it will use some of the GNOME 2 components is mostly an implementation detail - it is way more efficient than building something else. (That said, I think someone could hack up a simple panel + system status equivalent in javascript in no more than a few weeks if they wanted to. And I think that would actually be preferable for a number of reasons.) There is no I want a new GNOME but not GNOME 3 mode. There aren't two GNOMEs - only the one we barely have enough help designing, building, and testing already. If you want your system to be exactly as it is now my recommendation would be to leave it just as it is now. It's not a problem of what users want, many people want gnome 3 but they can't run the shell because of the 3D support. What I meant was that if I can't run gnome-shell (even if I wanted) I expect the fallback mode to be what I had in gnome 2, because otherwhise gnome 3 will be a regression for non 3D users. It doesn't make any sense for the user to have an entirely different concept in the fallback that isn't available in the default. Nor does it make any sense for us to provide a developer API and add-on system that only works in the fallback mode. gnome-panel is already an entirely different concept, that's why I don't see the problem of leaving the applets too. GNOME 3 is a change. Both the default and the fallback modes will be different from GNOME 2. We can't and shouldn't shy away from that. I don't know if there are plans to work on gnome-panel for gnome 3, but in this moment the panel is exactly the same, or even worse since it doesn't even work with gtk3. People who don't desire such changes are not obligated to make them. I agree, note that I'm thinking of people who can't use the shell (and fortunately I'm not one of those anymore, since I bought a new laptop recently and I took care of buying it with an intel video card to make sure I'll be able to use gnome3 with gnome-shell) Regards, -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x523E6462 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Carlos Garcia Campos carlo...@gnome.org wrote: Excerpts from William Jon McCann's message of vie dic 24 00:32:40 +0100 2010: GNOME 3 is a change. Both the default and the fallback modes will be different from GNOME 2. We can't and shouldn't shy away from that. I don't know if there are plans to work on gnome-panel for gnome 3, but in this moment the panel is exactly the same, or even worse since it doesn't even work with gtk3. Is it a good idea to make gnome-panel work with gtk3? Will that break all the gtk2 applets out there in the world which can't/won't be ported? -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi Dave! Do you have any figures on what percentage of Linux users will have the 3D capabilities necessary? Just wondering. Do you have statistics about what hardware people use with Linux? Than it is easy to find out. But all newer ( 5 years) Intel, AMD/ATI and NVidia chips work so that should make a big percentage on the market. * Mac Mini PPC, running a quite old Ubuntu (no 3D) Don't think there is 3d on ppc. * Samsung NC20 (Integrated on board Via graphics chip - no 3D - got this to run Moblin, didn't work, currently running Ubuntu 9.10) I don't think VIA has decent 3d drivers but I might be wrong. * Dell Latitude D420 (Intel graphics, should work, but 3D stuff runs really slowly, currently running Ubuntu 9.10) Intel graphics works fast enough for the shell. * Dell Optiplex 360 (ATI chip, no 3D) According to google this has ATI Radion HD2/3xxx with works with radeon drivers. * Dell Latitude E6500 (Intel chip again, 3D works fine, running Ubuntu 10.04) ok. * Lenovo Ideapad, running MeeGo 1.1 (3D fine) ok. I would like to be able to upgrade a distro some time in the next few years on at least some of these (the Mac Mini D420 are close to retirement, but the Optiplex will live on, as will the netbooks), and I would like to be sure that the desktop of my choice will provide a reasonable level of functionality. So you are lucky that all of your devices that don't retire will support GNOME Shell. Regards, Johannes ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: I am confused, what's the story with gnome-panel and gnome-applets in 3.0? Are they in, are they out? If gnome 3 is to support gnome2 compat mode, both of these components should stay in for some while, right? Currently, the situation in in jhbuild is very strange: gnome-panel is still there, gnome-applets are gone. Is this planned? Who'd need the panel without the applets? I pointed this after the new modulesets were pushed, you can read the answer Jon gave here: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2010-December/msg4.html The relevant part: | - gnome-applets (even if we still have gnome-panel) | | RIP. Essential applets should be part of gnome-panel itself. It | doesn't make sense to have applets only in the gnome 2 fallback | experience. Cheers, Frederic ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Excerpts from Frederic Peters's message of jue dic 23 10:22:40 +0100 2010: Hi, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: I am confused, what's the story with gnome-panel and gnome-applets in 3.0? Are they in, are they out? If gnome 3 is to support gnome2 compat mode, both of these components should stay in for some while, right? Currently, the situation in in jhbuild is very strange: gnome-panel is still there, gnome-applets are gone. Is this planned? Who'd need the panel without the applets? I pointed this after the new modulesets were pushed, you can read the answer Jon gave here: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2010-December/msg4.html The relevant part: | - gnome-applets (even if we still have gnome-panel) | | RIP. Essential applets should be part of gnome-panel itself. It | doesn't make sense to have applets only in the gnome 2 fallback | experience. I disagree. If I run gnome-session with the classic mode I expect to see exactly what I have right now, with all the applets. The definition of essential applet is probably different for every user. GNOME 2 fallback experience should be gnome-panel, metacity and gnome-applets. Regards, -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=getsearch=0x523E6462 signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:54, Carlos Garcia Campos carlo...@gnome.orgwrote: I disagree. If I run gnome-session with the classic mode I expect to see exactly what I have right now, with all the applets. The definition of essential applet is probably different for every user. I am not a designer but I've been paying attention to this process for about 1.5 years now so I think I can address your concerns. We are on the path of ending the insanity of behavior customization with GNOME 3 (though all are welcome to help with the maintenance of the gnome-applets module, of course.) Obviously, personalization is staying (wallpaper, themes, cursors, sounds, preferences). In GNOME 3, the objective is create a desktop that actually works out of the box; one that doesn't require that you help your family members fiddle with a bunch of settings before it's a tolerable experience. (For example, the very first thing I kill is the workspace switcher and show desktop applets because no family member can comprehend looking at them to figure out where all their windows just went after they accidentally click them. In Shell these are replaced with the same features but in a way which has an actual usable UI.) This means stopping the abuse of applets which in some cases are stand-ins for something that should be a desktop widget (Finance and Deskbar, for example)[1] and in other cases are horrible hacks that try to fix bad design elsewhere in the OS (battery charge applet predates g-p-m, for example). Others are just a pointless toys which are maintenance burden. In most cases the outcome will be that some combination of the legacy notification area icons and essential applets will provide access to hardware-related and session-related functions in the order and locations they located in the Shell design. Clearly, network, keyboard, power, a11y, sound, bluetooth, system, applications and clock are staying. Probably launchers. Places is a long-term unknown. There are going to be others; the list is still a work in-progress. GNOME 2 fallback experience should be gnome-panel, metacity and gnome-applets. It's a fallback but it's also going in to long-term maintenance mode which means we need to have a coherent experience between the compatible and Shell desktop environments. And they need to continue to adapt to API changes. Try to imagine the next major vertical hardware integration to come along, say, for example, that we get a desktop-wide, WiFi supported, geolocation API with privacy guards. Now we have to write a geolocation indicator and UI for both shells. (Just speculating.) We're planning for the future here and for one in which everyone has a good experience without having to muck around. [1] There are no shortage of projects which try to do exactly this. See Docky, Avant, Google Desktop, etc. ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 15:01 -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote: On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:54, Carlos Garcia Campos carlo...@gnome.org wrote: I disagree. If I run gnome-session with the classic mode I expect to see exactly what I have right now, with all the applets. The definition of essential applet is probably different for every user. I am not a designer but I've been paying attention to this process for about 1.5 years now so I think I can address your concerns. We are on the path of ending the insanity of behavior customization with GNOME 3 (though all are welcome to help with the maintenance of the gnome-applets module, of course.) Obviously, personalization is staying (wallpaper, themes, cursors, sounds, preferences). In GNOME 3, the objective is create a desktop that actually works out of the box; one that doesn't require that you help your family members fiddle with a bunch of settings before it's a tolerable experience. (For example, the very first thing I kill is the workspace switcher and show desktop applets because no family member can comprehend looking at them to figure out where all their windows just went after they accidentally click them. In Shell these are replaced with the same features but in a way which has an actual usable UI.) This means stopping the abuse of applets which in some cases are stand-ins for something that should be a desktop widget (Finance and Deskbar, for example)[1] and in other cases are horrible hacks that try to fix bad design elsewhere in the OS (battery charge applet predates g-p-m, for example). Others are just a pointless toys which are maintenance burden. In most cases the outcome will be that some combination of the legacy notification area icons and essential applets will provide access to hardware-related and session-related functions in the order and locations they located in the Shell design. Clearly, network, keyboard, power, a11y, sound, bluetooth, system, applications and clock are staying. Probably launchers. Places is a long-term unknown. There are going to be others; the list is still a work in-progress. GNOME 2 fallback experience should be gnome-panel, metacity and gnome-applets. It's a fallback but it's also going in to long-term maintenance mode which means we need to have a coherent experience between the compatible and Shell desktop environments. And they need to continue to adapt to API changes. Try to imagine the next major vertical hardware integration to come along, say, for example, that we get a desktop-wide, WiFi supported, geolocation API with privacy guards. Now we have to write a geolocation indicator and UI for both shells. (Just speculating.) We're planning for the future here and for one in which everyone has a good experience without having to muck around. Though I agree that we must planning the future, we also need to give a migration path for our users. There are big deployments out there, and sometimes they need _time_ for evaluating the new features, updating their hardware if necessary, adapting their configurations, etc. I think that it is even a good idea to give a maintenance promise for a specific period of time for gnome-panel, metacity and gnome-applets. But, talk is cheap and I don't know if we as a project can made this promise. Just my two cents, -- Juanjo Marin ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Hi Carlos, On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Carlos Garcia Campos carlo...@gnome.org wrote: Excerpts from Frederic Peters's message of jue dic 23 10:22:40 +0100 2010: Hi, Sergey Udaltsov wrote: I am confused, what's the story with gnome-panel and gnome-applets in 3.0? Are they in, are they out? If gnome 3 is to support gnome2 compat mode, both of these components should stay in for some while, right? Currently, the situation in in jhbuild is very strange: gnome-panel is still there, gnome-applets are gone. Is this planned? Who'd need the panel without the applets? I pointed this after the new modulesets were pushed, you can read the answer Jon gave here: http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2010-December/msg4.html The relevant part: | - gnome-applets (even if we still have gnome-panel) | | RIP. Essential applets should be part of gnome-panel itself. It | doesn't make sense to have applets only in the gnome 2 fallback | experience. I disagree. If I run gnome-session with the classic mode I expect to see exactly what I have right now, with all the applets. The definition of essential applet is probably different for every user. GNOME 2 fallback experience should be gnome-panel, metacity and gnome-applets. It is important to note that there is no such classic mode. There is a fallback mode for when 3D support is not available. The fact that it will use some of the GNOME 2 components is mostly an implementation detail - it is way more efficient than building something else. (That said, I think someone could hack up a simple panel + system status equivalent in javascript in no more than a few weeks if they wanted to. And I think that would actually be preferable for a number of reasons.) There is no I want a new GNOME but not GNOME 3 mode. There aren't two GNOMEs - only the one we barely have enough help designing, building, and testing already. If you want your system to be exactly as it is now my recommendation would be to leave it just as it is now. It doesn't make any sense for the user to have an entirely different concept in the fallback that isn't available in the default. Nor does it make any sense for us to provide a developer API and add-on system that only works in the fallback mode. GNOME 3 is a change. Both the default and the fallback modes will be different from GNOME 2. We can't and shouldn't shy away from that. People who don't desire such changes are not obligated to make them. Cheers, Jon ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Juanjo Marin juanjomari...@yahoo.es wrote: Though I agree that we must planning the future, we also need to give a migration path for our users. There are big deployments out there, and sometimes they need _time_ for evaluating the new features, updating their hardware if necessary, adapting their configurations, etc. Then they should wait to upgrade to GNOME 3 until they are ready. Nobody is forcing these big deployments to upgrade every six months (in fact, for most big deployments that would never have been a reasonable policy). In most circumstances, they are probably using enterprise distributions or conservative stable distributions that wouldn't be deploying GNOME 3 immediately anyway. I agree heavily with Jon's response in this thread, specifically that People who don't desire such changes are not obligated to make them. Sandy ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
gnome-panel gnome-applets?
I am confused, what's the story with gnome-panel and gnome-applets in 3.0? Are they in, are they out? If gnome 3 is to support gnome2 compat mode, both of these components should stay in for some while, right? Currently, the situation in in jhbuild is very strange: gnome-panel is still there, gnome-applets are gone. Is this planned? Who'd need the panel without the applets? Cheers, Sergey ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: gnome-panel gnome-applets?
Confused as well. On 14 December 2010 16:49, Sergey Udaltsov sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote: I am confused, what's the story with gnome-panel and gnome-applets in 3.0? Are they in, are they out? If gnome 3 is to support gnome2 compat mode, both of these components should stay in for some while, right? Currently, the situation in in jhbuild is very strange: gnome-panel is still there, gnome-applets are gone. Is this planned? Who'd need the panel without the applets? Cheers, Sergey ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
