Re: Proposal to (formally/easily) allowing multiple versions of the same library installable
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 03:21:17PM +0330, Hedayat Vatankhah wrote: Summary: I have a proposal to make it easier for maintainers to have multiple versions of the same library in distro (by making it *naturally* Mageia has something, but only meant to transition from one library version to the next. Includes macro's to generate the -devel package name, the normal package name, etc. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: FESCo Elections results
On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 02:52:51PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: What does this tell you? :-) [..] Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: F22 System Wide Change: GNOME 3.16
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:46:48AM -0500, Paul Wouters wrote: Actually, I've ran into a few cases now where upstream has removed essential workflow features and I think we should make it clear to upstream that we are deviating from them unless they re-focus on user freedom. For example: [..] I'd suggest to phrase that slightly differently, instead of re-focus say something like also focus. This as the focus is often mainly at making things work by default / automatically. Similarly, user freedom could be seen as GPL (guaranteed source code availability). E.g. I find it important that anyone can see the source code and could theoretically modify it. Because of those things, also focus to ensure discussion is different. Is there a way where we as fedora community can convey that to the gnome project without this ending up in mud fights flamewars or threats? One on one discussions with the various designers help. Secondly there is a lack of testing (usability/user experience). It is often discussed at various conferences and every so often testing is taking place. If someone puts in effort to perform usability testing that person will likely gain a lot of respect. Respect leads to influence. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: F22 System Wide Change: Replace Yum With DNF
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:16:41AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 13.06.2014 10:15, schrieb Richard Hughes: On 12 June 2014 16:54, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote: DNF is a fork of YUM and pretends to be compatible and if it finally replaces YUM it's just a new generation of YUM Just do a side-by-side comparison of the code bases. Calling dnf yum would be a lie indeed and why do you call GNOME3 then GNOME? Ehr? Most modules are pretty much the same. Code wise, not that many changes. New module called gnome-shell and the looks greatly changed. Code wise? Not so much. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Patches for trivial bugs sitting in bugzilla - trivial patch policy?
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 03:27:21PM -0500, Mukundan Ragavan wrote: Isn't it best for the project as a whole to have the bar for proven packager high? :) I think it is detrimental. If someone has loads of time to do bugfixes across packages, let them. I do loads and loads of trivial bugfixes (not in Fedora). Stuff like cleaning spec files of old things. Changing http into https. Updating the URLs. Very trivial. The knowledge required to do such things is trivial, the work usually is mundane. What you need is to notice when someone is doing more that they can handle and educate them (this is different than taking permissions away asap). High bar to me just means either things don't get done, or existing people get overworked. Any project always needs new blood, they're going to make mistakes. Possibility of mistakes shouldn't be used to block new people IMO. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: unaccessability
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:33:09PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: On Sun, 2013-11-17 at 05:33 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 12:50:11PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: Oh, hey, look. That place is rapidly becoming the 'crap, we don't know where to put this' dumping ground for GNOME 3, isn't it? It has been there since 3.0 AFAIK, so rapidly becoming is incorrect. It keeps growing more bits, though. My memory is terrible, I thought that part is pretty much unchanged. It is not the perfect place, that was mentioned by a designer. But better to have it somewhere than nowhere. You can search for preferred and have this show up. Anyway, calling design decisions crap and dumping ground is kind of needlessly emotional. No emotion involved, I'm afraid. Ah ok, I should assume better -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: unaccessability
On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 05:51:22PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: GNOME has a few 'preferred apps' settings left but I don't think they're exposed in the UI anywhere. There are the following dconf keys: Settings → Details → Default applications No terminal option though. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: unaccessability
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 12:50:11PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: Oh, hey, look. That place is rapidly becoming the 'crap, we don't know where to put this' dumping ground for GNOME 3, isn't it? It has been there since 3.0 AFAIK, so rapidly becoming is incorrect. Anyway, calling design decisions crap and dumping ground is kind of needlessly emotional. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:53:48AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Olav Vitters wrote: AFAIK (not sure), it should come somewhat easy once you the distribution is based upon systemd. That means it will exclude the most popular distribution out there. I fail to see the point of discussing non-Fedora distributions on Fedora devel mailing list. If you want to discuss GNOME, we also have a development list, see https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list. A bit more logical to include people who actually work on this and less annoying to people who don't want to discuss other distributions on the Fedora mailing list. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 04:01:09AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Well yes, each time you try to force a change through which actually makes things worse, there WILL be resistance. In fact, this is already what is happening in this thread, the app proposal coming from (parts of) the Workstation WG. That you see a proposal as forcing things through is unfortunate. But I don't see much resistance, there are concerns and sometimes voiced in a strange way, but that's pretty much it. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:50:59AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Olav Vitters wrote: On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 01:00:16AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Bastien Nocera wrote: Might not want to put answers in people's mouths. Did you read up on the various bundling techniques that were explored and the API/ABI guarantees we want to offer? I'll stop short of paraphrasing you. The fact that bundling is even being explored as a technique at all makes me puke! That's offtopic. How is pointing out a fundamental unfixable flaw in the approach you are advocating off topic? You're pointing out that you want to puke. That's offtopic for this mailing list. I rather not know the amount of detail that you're displaying. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:33:57AM +0100, Sergio Pascual wrote: 2013/11/7 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:53:48AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Olav Vitters wrote: AFAIK (not sure), it should come somewhat easy once you the distribution is based upon systemd. That means it will exclude the most popular distribution out there. I fail to see the point of discussing non-Fedora distributions on Fedora devel mailing list. I fail to see the point of discussing a feature that is meant to allow upstreams to provide installable bundles that work in all linuxes if it is only to work in Fedora. I already talked about other distributions so your concern has been addressed already. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 02:28:09PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: I fail to see the point of discussing non-GNOME-specific problems on a GNOME development list. A bit more logical to include people who actually work on non-GNOME software and don't want to discuss non-GNOME app distribution on a GNOME list. As mentioned, I said the interested people are on that mailing list. Anyway, if you want to discuss another distribution on Fedora mailing list, I think it is stupid and pointless, but that is just my opinion. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 10:45:29AM +, Frank Murphy wrote: On Thu, 7 Nov 2013 11:17:28 +0100 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote: On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:53:48AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Olav Vitters wrote: AFAIK (not sure), it should come somewhat easy once you the distribution is based upon systemd. That means it will exclude the most popular distribution out there. I fail to see the point of discussing non-Fedora distributions on Fedora devel mailing list. If you want to discuss GNOME, we also have a development list, see https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list. To be fair you introduced Guadec, aka Gnome developemt. (I'm not pro\anti Gnome) I explained that this thought has been discussed and introduced at a conference. If people cannot the mention of GNOME: not my problem. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 12:58:37PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: On 11/06/2013 11:30 PM, Olav Vitters wrote: On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 10:55:30PM +0100, Sergio Pascual wrote: Has this sanboxed-bundled-from-upstream proposal been discussed with other distributions? If the final result is that the Universal Linux Package only works in Fedora we are not gaining anything. A lot of this is being based on technology that's not really available yet such as kdbus, Wayland, systemd bits. This has been discussed at GUADEC (GNOME conference): http://www.superlectures.com/guadec2013/sandboxed-applications-for-gnome Wayland and systemd strongly suggest no Ubuntu interoperability whatsoever. Shouldn't this be a top priority for bundled applications? Canonical does what Canonical wants to do. They already have their own solution for something like this. It is just very distribution specific and not as secure as what this is proposing AFAIK. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 08:57:06AM -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote: Which basically says that the working group is going to work on that. There's actually 0 technical details on how the implemetation will work out, or even if it will. http://www.superlectures.com/guadec2013/sandboxed-applications-for-gnome So there have been lots of thought and work going into this. But maybe more needs to be written down in the proposal as you mentioned. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 04:06:04PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Peter Robinson wrote: I don't see many people forcing things through, I believe that the vast majority of contributors either like the change or aren't bothered by it. Ah, the silent majority hypothesis, always a fun argument to bring (with no evidence whatsoever) when one is clearly losing a discussion. Ok, you're against silent majority hypothesis Can't you just admit that the consensus is AGAINST Apple-like apps? Wait, I thought you were against silent majority hypothesis? -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 03:45:13PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Maybe that's because Coprs were never announced with huge rants about market-share and how Fedora packaging sucked and was irrelevant? I'm pretty sure you're misunderstanding what people are saying if you think above. What I wrote might be understood like above, but that's not what I meant at all. Suggest to reread what people wrote. A few comments to make it easier: I was talking about the *review process*. That can take *ages*. Secondly, this is not meant to replace packages, no packages are not at all irrelevant. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:59:00AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: In short: Make the defaults as sane as possible, but still allow the user to change them if they disagree with you on what is sane. The more options, the better. The definition given by Frank Murphy is totally different and doesn't align with above. Above also doesn't relate to developers. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 01:00:16AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Bastien Nocera wrote: Might not want to put answers in people's mouths. Did you read up on the various bundling techniques that were explored and the API/ABI guarantees we want to offer? I'll stop short of paraphrasing you. The fact that bundling is even being explored as a technique at all makes me puke! That's offtopic. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 01:23:01PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: So let me step into my handy Tardis and bring back a vignette from the Real World after Fedora and other distributions bless upstream app distribution as a preferred channel: Could you give some practical programs which are impacted by this? From what I can see, loads of programs are not packaged by a distribution. They might have a package for one distribution, but then not for another. For a manager/techy type situation, I fail to understand practical programs which would be impacted. Usually manager/techy means proprietary, in which case you usually have packages for a few distributions, but not all. Really popular applications already provide packages for a few distributions (but again not all). The intention of these apps are to give an app for a distribution before it's included within the distribution itself. If the distribution method is really that more inconvenient, then this should be addressed. But IMO the app thing is happening anyway. I really dislike these artificial roadblocks for proprietary software. The conversation IMO goes more like this: - Manager: Hey can we provide something on this Linux thing? - Techy: 20min of tech talk - Manager looking at his phone 10 secs into the conversation - Manager: maybe we go for something less complicated vs Techy: 1st quick n dirty (app), then improve on that (distributions) -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 01:25:29AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: But many of those concerns are inherent to the concept of sandboxed applications or the methods of delivery they'd enable and cannot possibly be addressed, ever. The whole concept is fatally flawed. I'd suggest trying a different hat than just black. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Thinking_Hats Suggest to also think of how to address concerns. At the moment, it seems you want to bribe programs to accept a complicated and long process (distributions) because the alternative might be too easy (apps). This highlights a concern, not a fatal flaw. The flaw IMO is within the distribution method. It takes a long time and currently there is nothing that makes it easy. Luckily there is no other method at the moment to archive that. Say you have this new application and you want to provide it to (most) Linux users *now* (not 6+ months later). There should be an answer for that. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:35:59AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: I think users will not understand why all the vendor repositories with non- free crap are there and the stuff they are actually looking for is not. Whether or not proprietary is crap or not is offtopic. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 07:26:48PM +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: places - _the_ distribution, _the_ app store, _the_ amazon.com. And the difficulty of getting a set of bits to amazon.com / an app store / a RPM is very similar. If one will immediately solve it for multiple distributions, then the gain is immensely higher. An IMO, it is not about RPM vs another packaging format. To get into Fedora, you need an account, reviews, etc. It is a pretty long process. This hopefully is much quicker with greater results. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 10:55:30PM +0100, Sergio Pascual wrote: Has this sanboxed-bundled-from-upstream proposal been discussed with other distributions? If the final result is that the Universal Linux Package only works in Fedora we are not gaining anything. A lot of this is being based on technology that's not really available yet such as kdbus, Wayland, systemd bits. This has been discussed at GUADEC (GNOME conference): http://www.superlectures.com/guadec2013/sandboxed-applications-for-gnome AFAIK (not sure), it should come somewhat easy once you the distribution is based upon systemd. I assume Lennart will talk about it at various conferences. For e.g. Mageia, the focus is currently on releasing Mageia 4. Features for Mageia 5 is later, so probably discuss it at FOSDEM (beginning of Feb). -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 11:05:21PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: As all such schemes it works as long as you ignore the fact that apps process data and communicate with other apps. That's not being overlooked. Probably the presentation already addresses this concern. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 06:19:48PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: I disagree with the premise that to get anywhere, we would need to bend over backwards to the proprietary market and adopt their inferior software distribution strategies. If that were true, we could give up right here, we'd have already lost. [..] If Adobe were to want Photoshop on a linux desktop, I think that would be great news. It would be hugely disruptive. Hugely disruptive to your freedom, indeed… What's wrong with GIMP? I don't get why you want to force your view of freedom onto everyone. These sandboxed applications is not just for proprietary software. I don't think it'll replace the current distribution model. It will generate some competition. IMO competition is good, instead of preventing sandboxed applications, show that the packaged applications are preferred. Now such distribution of applications also easily allow proprietary applications: Awesome, finally! Easy to run Steam, Photoshop, etc. The kernel is GPL and doesn't force this licence on Adobe. You can have whatever license you want as application. These sandboxed applications do suffer from various drawbacks, so better to believe in your solution than to try and block another view IMO. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Draft Product Description for Fedora Workstation
On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 12:56:47PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: bad outcome as low as possible. Let's just try it and see what happens! is not a mature approach to risk management. Ehr, instead of promoting something as supported, just start off slow. Call if alpha, write down all the concerns, etc. Announcing this as the new supported + preferred way is not what is intended IMO. Your post effectively read as stop energy IMO. It is impossible to get everything right at the first version. Just ensure everyones expectation is correct. Call it experimental + alpha initially. Various concerns have been raised. Just write them down, make a plan to address them, done. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
Re: Fedora as an crowd founded project an additional funding source to our sponsor
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 01:32:22PM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: Fedora the project which means two entirely separated infrastructures. yeah sure these two might be communicating heavily between themselves unless ofcourse you want to risk issues from either the company or the project being able to directly affect each other when someone screws up or something fails or something needs to be updated in either the company or the project and that's just bad administrator practices. You're talking about not sharing a network. The other person was discussing the money side of things. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Sendmail
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 03:13:28PM -0500, Billy Crook wrote: I would love to see the day systemd is as polished, ubiquitous, and robust as smtp. But until that happens, nobody is helped by removing MTA from the default install. We're not there yet, and theres no systemd and SMTP are not related. This kind of argument is just stop energy. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Sendmail
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:57:15AM -0400, Fulko Hew wrote: But, personally, I agree with billycr...@gmail.com... On the servers I run, and the server applications I've written, the use of email is mandatory and the use of an MTA is the best, most-efficient way to deal with the email. I say... servers should definitely have a default MTA. IMO email is terribly crappy way of informing. You get way too many emails. In any case, as soon as you have more than a few servers, you'll have some configuration management thing to set things up, e.g. Puppet or anything similar. I dislike sendmail, prefer Postfix. All of that is automatic. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: F20 System Wide Change: No Default Syslog
On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 12:23:33PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: What's inappropriate is giving instructions to others what they can, or can not say. Even better would be to take this sort of stuff off list asap. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Do you think this is a security risk and if not is it a bad UI decision?
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 09:51:22AM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote: On 05/04/2013 12:30 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 11:24:01PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: Matthew, with all due respect the tone of the bug doesn't make me think that there is a lot of interest in discussion from the developers. Reopening bugs is generally a good way of ensuring that there's even less interest in discussion from the developers, and posting to mailing lists that most of the developers concerned don't read has pretty obvious problems in terms of changing their minds. From the process point of view, it does look a little obstructionist: No, we won't discuss it in Bugzilla; No we won't discuss it in fedora-devel either. Reminds me of the joke: Lunch on Tuesday? Sorry, can't do it on Tuesday---how about Never? is Never good for you?. I understand your point that the concerned Anaconda developers may simply not see the traffic, but they do know about the Bugzilla entry and this discussion on the devel list, so I hope that they could find it in their heart to put out their argument in the forum with the largest possible audience which at the moment seems to be here. The simple explanation is: - Bugzilla is awful to have a discussion. It is to solve bugs and focus on how to solve a particular bug - If you want a discussion, hold it with the developers Meaning anaconda-developers Big changes deserve more explanation and outreach from the developers, not just dropping them in everyone's lap. Define big. To any developer, this change is minor. Usually big or invasive is explained as I have an issue with it, no matter how small. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Do you think this is a security risk and if not is it a bad UI decision?
On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 12:03:39AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: Anaconda has a pretty special place in this project. It is the uber-administrator of every new Fedora install. We would do better as a community to hash out major changes before they're made, and try to reach some agreement before we implement them. I've been reading loads and loads of blogs about the Anaconda redesign. That was a pretty major change. Something like showing a password is terribly minor change when developing. There was a pretty huge outcry about the Anaconda redesign, despite all the blogs. Now there is some small change, and there is a call that major changes need to be hashed out. Seems like nothing they'd do would ever be good enough. Getting consensus before most commits sounds like a good way to scare away developers. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Do you think this is a security risk and if not is it a bad UI decision?
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 09:03:02PM -0700, Dan Mashal wrote: Let's be realistic here. The precedence they have recently set is they make decisions and if you don't like it too bad. Even if that is true, what is your point? -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: libvirt-cim - RPM build error
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 09:15:45AM +0200, poma wrote: As stated in the attach. For bugs please use Bugzilla (attach the patch there). Also, in mailing list please send a new email instead of replying to an existing email. Many people on mailing lists use software that'll still show your email as a reply to the original email, despite changing the subject. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:20:21AM -0400, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote: It's unfortunately demoware. While the LinuxBIOS project has optimized BIOS on a few systrems, server grade hardware can take up to five minutes simply to get past all the Power-On-Self-Test operations. And just because the Windows logo is up does not mean the system is actually for another few minutes, while slow and but unreported Hi, I'm not talking about demoware or servers: I said on a laptop and that it is a realistic future. Basically need a Windows logo laptop and no LVM. Servers and multiple OS'es is something different. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 12:12:54PM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote: +1 -1 Or in other words: This is not Google+, please don't quote entire emails. I do remember the AOL time. An argument can stand on itself without a popularity vote. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:14:05AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote: On 03/13/2013 09:23 AM, Ian Malone wrote: Then you have good students. Are teens and pre-teens fedora's main target audience now? I'm really not sure what it is anymore. Is there any good reason to exclude them? I started using Linux (Red Hat 5.1) as a 3rd year high school student. My first thought was (think 5.0, at that time people called it the most buggy release ever:P): this stuff is complicated! Reasoning: You want to finally try out this Linux, and even in just one second you have to spend effort to figure out what it is doing. It gave the impression of a steep learning curve and that I maybe should've bought a book first (considered a book as expensive thing and not sure of the benefit). Of course things changed a lot since then. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 03:14:01PM -0500, Chris Adams wrote: I haven't seen systems that boot in less than 6 seconds (and by boot I mean power-on to login prompt). Maybe they exist, but that is not my experience with common hardware. At FOSDEM they demonstrated 2 seconds for kernel + userspace. Userspace being GDM. The initialization of the presenter took longer than the kernel+userspace bit, so they had to use a camera to actually show this. The firmware on that laptop took about 7 seconds. As Lennart mentioned elsewhere, new laptops must do less than 2 seconds to get that nice Windows logo, some do 0.5 seconds. So laptop booting to GDM in 2.5 - 4 seconds after pressing the power button is realistic. 350MB video of the presentation: http://video.fosdem.org/2013/maintracks/Janson/systemd,_Two_Years_Later.webm The demonstration is at the beginning. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 09:56:57AM -0400, Steve Clark wrote: On 03/12/2013 09:33 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Tue, 12.03.13 09:13, Steve Clark (scl...@netwolves.com) wrote: You know: *you* might not need fast boot. *Your* systems you might not reboot only every other week. *Your* server system might have a very slow BIOS POST. But we don't do this OS for *you* alone. Fedora has a certain claim of universality. And that's why fast boot matters to Fedora. [..] How in the hell does 2 more seconds when booting a Desktop make any difference in an 8 to 10 hour day that the computer is going to be up. Go get a cup a coffee! As you're making a suggestion towards Lennart, can I also make the suggestion that you read his email? This as he already addressed your it does not matter for me. You keep touting window 8 - maybe you should just use it an leave Linux alone! Why not reconfigure Grub on your own to have a 30 second delay? -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Improving the Fedora boot experience
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 03:21:54PM -0400, Steve Clark wrote: On 03/12/2013 02:23 PM, Reindl Harald wrote: but the better option for us all would be if people with this attitude switch to these operating systems instead damage slowly what we know as UNIX-LIKE system I *completely* *detest* this kind of conversation style. Well said Reindl !l I do not agree at all. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: RFC: Fedora revamp proposal
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 07:18:04PM +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: Some of the things we want to achieve: * Make rawhide to be reliably installable and usable by developers by coherently introducing changes. Mageia packages libraries by the .so major version. So you can upgrade a library and then work on rebuilding all the software. Example (library name is not too important): lib64spice-client-gtk3.0_1-0.9-1.mga2 lib64spice-client-gtk3.0_4-0.15-3.mga3 Developers can work on the new library, then gradually packagers can work on rebuilding all the software. At no point will a users machine break because you still have the old library. Obvious drawback is making 'yum' (or whatever) intelligent enough to automatically remove those libraries. Also it should be removed from the main mirror at one point (Mageia does that after 2 weeks, so any dependant package needs to be rebuild within those 2 weeks). After those 2 weeks you could have issues if you install 'Rawhide' and the old library is not available in the repository anymore. Another factor is that on Fedora, it seems that it is ok to break Rawhide. At Mageia that is totally unacceptable. If it happens accidentally, ok, but very frowned upon if you just push changes you know might cause issues. Various things are done for those: test some changes yourself (when it seems needed), announce possible problems on the mailing list, push some changes to a special testing repository (to get more people to test your changes other than just you). -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Fedora 18 and new version of Gnome (3.7.x)
On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 12:28:51PM +0100, Dario Lesca wrote: There is some way to test new version of gnome on Fedora 18? Thanks The GNOME live image is currently based on Fedora (without the branding). So you could copy this to some USB stick and test that: http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/misc/testing/ -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 02:14:30PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Olav Vitters wrote: 1. Show sessions before selecting/entering the user: Means basically including something like 'default session' or 'previous session' That's how the rest of the world does it… 2. Show sessions after selecting/entering the user: Means you can show the actual session that will be chosen. There are tradeoffs between both of them, GDM chose #2, … but of course GNOME just had to be different. If you don't have anything constructive to add, then don't respond. I mentioned the aim: what is usability wise best. I mentioned that it might not be best, tradeoffs taken, and how to make changes. A one liner about: but of course GNOME just had to be different I just a bit easy. Try challenging what I said instead of a one liner. Try maybe showing a usability story where the chosen solution is not great. I mean, try something in the bits I said earlier. Regarding had to be different: I already explained that it was not about had to be different. Moreover, wtf is wrong with trying to go for trying a better solution? Not like things are stuck forever, as I already indicated. I'm trying to collect feedback, I'd expect some respect instead of one liners. Loads of people working in Fedora don't follow devel@ because of the attitude displayed here. I often get questioned wtf I spend the time to proceed anyway. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 06:20:52PM -0800, Samuel Sieb wrote: My understanding is that the session list is dependent on the user selected. At least the default session is, so it made sense to wait until a user is chosen before showing the list. Using this you can show the correct default session for that user. You have two possibilities: 1. Show sessions before selecting/entering the user: Means basically including something like 'default session' or 'previous session' 2. Show sessions after selecting/entering the user: Means you can show the actual session that will be chosen. There are tradeoffs between both of them, GDM chose #2, making some stuff nicer, some stuff worse. It would be nice if someone would do a usability study on this (maybe session selector should be more obvious or something… thinking of maybe a list instead of a dropdown). -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 12:15:10AM +0100, Martin Sourada wrote: What about users *without* password? It's insecure (in most cases), but possible. That is a known tradeoff/bug. IMO this is a case of 'it hurts when I do this'. Tradeoff is how often you have a nicer experience (showing the right session that will be selected) vs use cases that are broken or less nice. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 08:07:23AM +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote: On 02/08/2013 01:39 PM, drago01 wrote: On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Ralf Corsepius rc040...@freenet.de wrote: Gnome3 and Gnome2's GUI working principles are entirely different and therefore are catering the demands of different target audiences. Citation needed for implication is different - catering the demands of different target audiences . The main differences are: - Tiled GUI (Gnome3) vs. Menu GUI (Gnome2). GNOME 3.8 will give you a combination. - Non-configurable/dumb GUI-configuration (Gnome3) vs. highly customizable GUI (Gnome2). Extensions allow for way more changes than GNOME 2.x. - Dynamic workspaces (Gnome3) vs. static workspaces (Gnome2). You can select if you want to have dynamic workspaces or not. In 3.6 that is in gnome-tweak-tool. In 3.8 it would be part of 'classic mode' (hopefully the name will change). There'd be other discussworthy/questionable changes details, but I prefer not to mention them here, to avoid this thread to deviate further. Do not see how changes result in a different target audience. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Gnome-shell workspaces
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:18:09PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Olav Vitters wrote: I don't get why you reply to me. It seems anything people do is just bad. No tweak tool: bad A tweak tool: bad Strawman… What I actually mean is: Completely hidden or absent settings (no tweak tool): bad Settings hidden in a tweak tool: bad Settings available and exposed in the normal settings dialog: good That is exactly what I mean: I explained why it is not in the main dialog. The setting is available. There is a GUI. Still bad, has to be done in yet another way. For instance: Settings hidden in a tweak tool: Those settings aren't hidden. There was a nice post by a developer at Microsoft on settings. First there would be a request for a setting. Eventually it would be added to the registry. Then exposed somewhere else. Eventually in the main program. Every step hugely increases the amount of work that has to be done. I tried finding the blogpost, but very unfortunately could not. If the only thing you can do is complain about the work that other people do, find another hobby or something. This ad hominem attack deserves no reply. You call ad hominem and strawman way too quickly. Suggest not claiming stuff like Settings hidden in a tweak tool, as that is just not true. I could look up what term is used for that, but cannot be bothered. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Gnome-shell workspaces
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:20:04PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Olav Vitters wrote: PS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tweak_UI It was written by one individual employee and released as an unsupported tool. It'd have been a third-party tool if the author didn't happen to be an M$ employee. GNOME tweak tool was written by one developer and released as a unsupported tool. It'd would have been an unsupported tool if we didn't change our mind based on user feedback. The settings itself still might expose bugs. Pretty much the same as same as what happened with tweak UI? M$ is boring btw, use MS or Microsoft. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:37:31AM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 11.02.2013 11:31, schrieb Olav Vitters: On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:59:22PM +, Ian Malone wrote: In the end, more than any usability quibbles, the best reason to give up on a project is when it refuses to listen to its end users. The GNOME release notes over various cycles have listed loads of changes which have been made based on the things that have been learned. This happened during 2.x as well as 3.x. Although you do not explicitly state it, it seems you were talking about GNOME. Vincent Untz phrased it much better than I ever could, but he basically pointed at the Power Off. You can also read the release notes for loads of other changes this is all fine BUT why are things completly re-written and in a pre-alpha state released replacing and destroying the users workload and after that it takes years to fix all teh issues in the one or another way? I have a totally different view. Could you show me the bugreport about where GNOME destroyed something on a users machine? GNOME 3 was delayed by 2 cycles. Before that we made loads of releases available for testing. The 3.0 was really stable. this big mistakes are happening over and over and the speed these are happening is growing with each compontent instead learn from mistakes and release software after it is finished or do not make a rewrite at all Conflicts with release early and release often and the difference between testing by 50 people and releasing it for 500.000+. it does users not help much if 2-3 years later things starting to get useable again - why? because in the meantime someone is changing the next subsystem against a pre-alpha and years later people are proud to have fixed a lot of issues while forget that they all were introduced by release unready software That was addressed by Vincent during FOSDEM. I mean: - real usability testing (help welcome!) I mean huge groups, non-biased, representing everyone, etc - real studies on biggest issues (help welcome!) I don't mean an internet survey, or a study where the outcome is 'do what some other OS does'. I mean something which is a followup on what Sun did ages ago. - better communication (help welcome!) Sometimes a huge difference to what is decided/planned and what news sites announce e.g. the poweroff I wanted to see changed more quickly. It could've, but a study would've sped it up greatly. I mean a huge usability study at least every 2 years, and smaller ones after each release. This to address the difference between: - one developer working on something - a few developers (project gets a few developers) - 50+ developers (jhbuild people) - 500+ people (tarballs/unstable packages) - 5000+? people (beta cycle - 3.x.0) - nothing - 500.000+? (distro release) Every time the number of people increases 10-fold, you'll find more issues. Expecting that a few developers will ever release something that would be good enough for 500.000 is just unrealistic. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 03:50:56PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 12.02.2013 15:47, schrieb Olav Vitters: On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:37:31AM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 11.02.2013 11:31, schrieb Olav Vitters: On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:59:22PM +, Ian Malone wrote: In the end, more than any usability quibbles, the best reason to give up on a project is when it refuses to listen to its end users. The GNOME release notes over various cycles have listed loads of changes which have been made based on the things that have been learned. This happened during 2.x as well as 3.x. Although you do not explicitly state it, it seems you were talking about GNOME. Vincent Untz phrased it much better than I ever could, but he basically pointed at the Power Off. You can also read the release notes for loads of other changes this is all fine BUT why are things completly re-written and in a pre-alpha state released replacing and destroying the users workload and after that it takes years to fix all teh issues in the one or another way? I have a totally different view. Could you show me the bugreport about where GNOME destroyed something on a users machine? GNOME 3 was delayed by 2 cycles. Before that we made loads of releases available for testing. The 3.0 was really stable what are you not understanding in destroy users workload? it dies not help if software runs stable if it forces the user to completly re-learn how he used to do things workload = people are runnign their PC for working with it and doing things not only play around with the OS itself Did you read my email at all? In any case: destroy users workload In my understanding: 1. You're really angry (aka destroy: wtf!) 2. I have a totally different view 3. It seems you can speak on every users behalf (related to #2) Note that #2 I already quoted, aside from the things you snipped which gave IMO a friendly explanation. In any case, we can also turn this into a offlist flamewar if you want. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Gnome-shell workspaces
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 03:03:44PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Having a separate tweak tool is a lame workaround for lack of settings in the official tools. The only reason such tweak tools exist on proprietary operating systems is because the proprietary companies don't want to officially support some functionality, so you need a third-party tool to enable the hidden settings. Having an official tweak tool is really really silly. I don't get why you reply to me. It seems anything people do is just bad. No tweak tool: bad A tweak tool: bad If the only thing you can do is complain about the work that other people do, find another hobby or something. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Gnome-shell workspaces
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:12:32AM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote: On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 03:03:44PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Having a separate tweak tool is a lame workaround for lack of settings in the official tools. The only reason such tweak tools exist on proprietary operating systems is because the proprietary companies don't want to officially support some functionality, so you need a third-party tool to enable the hidden settings. Having an official tweak tool is really really silly. I don't get why you reply to me. It seems anything people do is just bad. No tweak tool: bad A tweak tool: bad If the only thing you can do is complain about the work that other people do, find another hobby or something. PS: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tweak_UI -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 07:59:22PM +, Ian Malone wrote: In the end, more than any usability quibbles, the best reason to give up on a project is when it refuses to listen to its end users. The GNOME release notes over various cycles have listed loads of changes which have been made based on the things that have been learned. This happened during 2.x as well as 3.x. Although you do not explicitly state it, it seems you were talking about GNOME. Vincent Untz phrased it much better than I ever could, but he basically pointed at the Power Off. You can also read the release notes for loads of other changes. If you see the development version of 3.8, you'll note an entire new workflow that is introduced. See above for some pointers and concrete data. I guess you assume because choices are made and that you cannot do everything (or whatever you requested), that this implies that no user is listened to. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Gnome-shell workspaces
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 01:30:02PM +0100, Mario Torre wrote: Il giorno dom, 10/02/2013 alle 14.47 +0100, Olav Vitters ha scritto: On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 01:28:54PM +0100, Trond Hasle Amundsen wrote: Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com writes: Somewhat funny that many users even don't know this tweak tool and ask everywhere about this.. I always found it odd that gnome-tweak-tool even exists.. some functionality are found in the system settings, some in gnome-tweak-tool. If you ask me, gnome-tweak-tool should be part of the standard system settings. Call it advanced shell options or something. It would be easier for users to find, provide a more consistent GNOME experience, and ultimately happier users. This has been addressed various times. In brief: Advanced buttons do not work. They'll be clicked every time. Tweak tool provides a different guarantee of stability. For instance: if you change an option in System Settings and it results in a bug it must be fixed asap. This argument is foo bar. If advanced buttons would be clicked any time... then it means users *want* to tweak those features, they should be integrated in the core preferences. Why should I ever need to install a separate tool to fix my font settings or to add back buttons to the otherwise useless and space wasting window bar? Just try to explain the following: - How does someone know if something is in Advanced or not? Gnome 3 is not an experimental desktop anymore, it's been around for some time and it's the default desktop in Fedora... it's about time to fix it [1]. Very vague statement? Help welcome :) -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Gnome-shell workspaces
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 01:30:29PM +0100, Mario Torre wrote: This argument doesn't really work, either. Care to provide any argumentation? At the moment if that were true, I'd could just refer to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_pot_calling_the_kettle_black But actually I explained myself. You're not. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Gnome-shell workspaces
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 01:28:54PM +0100, Trond Hasle Amundsen wrote: Christopher Meng cicku...@gmail.com writes: Somewhat funny that many users even don't know this tweak tool and ask everywhere about this.. I always found it odd that gnome-tweak-tool even exists.. some functionality are found in the system settings, some in gnome-tweak-tool. If you ask me, gnome-tweak-tool should be part of the standard system settings. Call it advanced shell options or something. It would be easier for users to find, provide a more consistent GNOME experience, and ultimately happier users. This has been addressed various times. In brief: Advanced buttons do not work. They'll be clicked every time. Tweak tool provides a different guarantee of stability. For instance: if you change an option in System Settings and it results in a bug it must be fixed asap. At the same time, the sloppy focus option in Tweak tool is known to have issues. And to avoid misunderstandings: sloppy focus has less issues with every release. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 08:35:56PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: Le Ven 8 février 2013 13:22, Olav Vitters a écrit : On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:34:58AM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: I am providing a datapoint that directly contradicts your original statement, namely that there is a completely different target audience for GNOME 2 vs GNOME 3. I am that datapoint. As are various others during FOSDEM (Vincent Untz asked people to raise their hands). No idea how representative that it. The FOSDEM poll was stacked — no one really wanted to hurt Vincent Untz too much given his obvious efforts to be nice, there was this knot of GNOME people bunched together that were a tad intimidating, and people do not go to FOSDEM to fight. What is telling however is the complete refusal of the audience to put systemd and Gnome 3 in the same bucket. Lennart's efforts to explain his project, understand sysadmin needs, provide a smooth transition and keep current usages working clearly paid off there. So don't overplay the GNOME 3 FOSDEM session, it was an awkward moment for everyone involved (and certainly not representative of the positive energy that permeated other presentations). 1. The poll was right at the beginning 2. I don't get how it is intimidating to raise your hand 3. I don't get how we were intimidating 4. A user interface is more like a bike shed than anything else Obviously I sat together with other GNOME people, as I know them. Sometimes I sit randomly in the audience. I find it curious that you find something negative about my behaviour. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 11:21:49PM +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: I stand by my statement that this was a very awkward moment, with Vincent and the GNOME team radiating unhappiness and pretty much everyone else being perplexed and wondering whether they should take offence at being accused of being mad or if it was some weird form of apology. Certainly not the kind of celebration being portrayed here. As for the vocifering, I'll leave that to others. Radiating unhappiness? As you're talking about me I will reply briefly: bullshit. I would appreciate that you stop suggesting this about my and my friends, thanks. Note that and I think most other didn't know the contents of the talk that Vincent would give. Did you actually attend the presentation? It really seems you did not. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 03:46:57PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Michael Scherer wrote: Gnome-shell is not mean to be used nor appropriate for a mobile phone. And despite being rather usable on a touch screen ( I tested ), it is still not sufficient there for 1 million of details ( Vincent Untz talk also said the same, see gnome people to see the details ). But it is clearly inspired by mobile phone UIs. Why? Phones are not the target, so why copy them? It leads to an interface which is not appropriate for ANY platform. It's not appropriate for mobile phones for the reasons you cite, it's not appropriate for computers because it looks and feels like a smartphone UI, so what IS it appropriate for? Touch friendliness (but on a laptop / desktop). Users of computers have certain expectations of how a user interface looks like, and gnome-shell completely fails to meet those expectations (as do Unity and Window$ 8's Modern UI (formerly known as Metro), which both suffer from the exact same problem). In my country smart phones are outselling computers, computer sales are way down. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 05:38:46PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: The only thing I can think of is that people turning their back on you, not looking at you when you are asked to raise your hand on something they worked on, this might be intimidating to some people. I was not one of these, and I certainly got a different feeling from this talk We were sitting at the front and thus you turn around to see how many people are raising their hands. In any case, I'll keep it brief. For this current argument: - I provided a measure, added that it is likely biased - No responses to the measure, just changing the topic into yet something else (GNOME developers are intimidating/looking for a fight) I'll leave it at that ☺ -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 10:22:41AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: drago01 wrote: There is no easy way to install applications (regular user don't want to mess up with packages). Huh? Fire up gnome-packagekit or Apper, choose your app, make 2 or 3 clicks (install, apply, confirm dependencies if any), enter your root password and the app is there. How do you propose making this any easier? I don't understand all this app store hype. Our repository system gives you the same advantages while being much sounder technically (automatic dependency resolution instead of bundling everything). It is providing a solution from the maintainer perspective. Ideally everything should be packaged by a distribution. But sometimes it is nice to have a stable distribution, bit still easily be able to test a development version of some app and see if your bug has been fixed. Same for the maintainer who just wants to provide something for loads of distributions, not wait if someone makes a package for every distribution out there. A distribution does not scale as much as all individual maintainers can IMO. That said, distribution is still preferred (drawbacks of the solution like shipping your own libraries is ugly). -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Fri, Feb 08, 2013 at 10:34:58AM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: I am providing a datapoint that directly contradicts your original statement, namely that there is a completely different target audience for GNOME 2 vs GNOME 3. I am that datapoint. As are various others during FOSDEM (Vincent Untz asked people to raise their hands). No idea how representative that it. Also people who didn't like it, etc. As said during that presentation, figuring out if something is felt by either a small focal minority or that it is generic (representative) is pretty difficult and anyone is of course feel free to assist. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 02:22:21PM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: Normally I try not to do this, but: what he said. Vincent Untz asked for a show of hands of people who used GNOME 2, GNOME 3, switched, etc. Recommend seeing the FOSDEM video. Loads of people indicated that they use GNOME 3, though less than GNOME 2. A while later he asked who loved GNOME 3. Not sure how many GNOME 3 users love it due to the time difference. There was one person who uses GNOME 3 and at the same time hates it. Anyway, recommend seeing the video once available, better than my guesswork :) Note: due to the topic (GNOME community gone crazy?), I didn't expect that many people who liked it would join actually. Note that the people who work on GNOME in some way sat together, only judged on people I did not recognize as people who help out GNOME in some way. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 09:28:16PM -0800, Eric Bergen wrote: Success! I've switched over to Cinnamon. The start style menu is back and I am happy. I'm sure I could get used to gnome-shell but my first experience wasn't a good one. To add: - Cinnamon was forked from gnome-shell, so any slowness you see in gnome-shell should be shared with Cinnamon, else the bugfix should be upstreamed. People have been saying that Cinnamon doesn't seem to include bugfixes made in gnome-shell though. Not verified/checked if that is true. - GNOME 3.8 will have a new mode with some kind of start menu and a few other things (being vague because it is in development, not released yet, plus I have not tried it yet) -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 08:06:51PM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: what makes me rellay angry (as one who never used and will use GNOME and i knew GNOME 1.0 and KDE 1.0 as well where most users of today not heard about linux at all) is that the GNOME developers did NOT learn ANYTHING by the KDE4.0 disaster and that distributions are not straight enough to show ignorant upstream if you think you can abuse all your users by present a completly different desktop with Please also look at all the changes we made and are making based on the feedback we have gotten over the various releases. It is often listed in the release notes, blogged about, etc. Extension system is a bit forgotten in the announcements, but that went from fully experimental to beta in just a few releases. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 12:04:44AM +0100, Rave it wrote: Your look in a crystal ball is far away from reality like the topic himself. Pls, give more to laugh. and stay close to facts instead of posting your personal perspective. This doesn't help us really. Pot calling the kettle black. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 11:13:48AM -0500, Pavel Simerda wrote: I wouldn't ask specific people to actually work on it. But it would be nice if the core developers provided more support, feature stability and API stability. To ask them to actively encourage alternative GUIs and allow them to be built on top of the Gnome stack instead of forking some of its projects... would be probably too much. We specifically allowed gnome-panel and the entire fallback mode to be forked / taken over once we received request for that. See the blogpost from Vincent Untz and the release email announcements for details. Also, gnome-main-menu is under the maintainership (@ git.gnome.org) of the MATE developers. If only it could be possible to make most of the Gnome devs learn from the community feedback instead of giving marvellous talks at conferences about how much the community is wrong. Seems you did not attend the talk. Suggest actually watching the video. Apologies for adding some facts to this discussion :P -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 04:23:43PM -0500, TK009 wrote: From where I sit, I am not convinced the Gnome team did any of that either beyond lip service. 6 versions to return shutdown speaks for itself. I saw this negativity was also on Phoronix, where someone else commented in a similar way: Are you happy with the shutdown yes or no? If yes, why do you not applaud it? Seems there is no way of pleasing people. Either we're not listening, or if we do listen, something else is found which *proves* we're bad anyway. Note that you've nicely ignored all the other changes made in those releases. Plus, 6 versions? Your math is off. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:06:51AM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: Am 31.01.2013 09:55, schrieb Olav Vitters: On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 04:23:43PM -0500, TK009 wrote: From where I sit, I am not convinced the Gnome team did any of that either beyond lip service. 6 versions to return shutdown speaks for itself. I saw this negativity was also on Phoronix, where someone else commented in a similar way: Are you happy with the shutdown yes or no? If yes, why do you not applaud it? Seems there is no way of pleasing people. Either we're not listening, or if we do listen, something else is found which *proves* we're bad anyway. Note that you've nicely ignored all the other changes made in those releases. Plus, 6 versions? Your math is off. like cripple down the filemanager more and more short ago? Thanks for providing an example! something else is found which *proves* we're bad anyway. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: New firstboot
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 03:47:33PM -0500, Simo Sorce wrote: When I install a freeipa server I do not want firstboot because I am not going to create local users anyway. I am going to install freeipa and then create users in LDAP. So far I just skipped firstboot by using tricks, like telling it I was going to configure a network server and then just canceling. But it would be nicer if I could simply skip it. Could such use cases not be built into firstboot? -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:13:34AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote: Let's see how lightweight, bug free and usable it is. Why don't you just merge the 3 projects instead of wasting your time? We could all work together. MATE developers actually have GNOME git accounts now. There could be different flavors of Gnome. Now I know that we are both biased here, however what it really feels like here is REDHAT employees want Gnome 3 and they are giving a bunch of bullshit excuses on why it should be, referencing various stupid apple to orange comparisons from 10 years ago. Why don't we take a poll where no Red Hat employees can bullshit, stupid vote. Only non Red Hat Fedora employees and the board itself can make a final decision after considering what FESCO has to say about it. Face it. Fedora 15 Gnome 3 cause a major uproar. Anaconda on RHEL6 is easier to use than Anaconda 18. Almost 3 years later and oh yeah we realized we should probably add a real fallback mode to Gnome 3. Meanwhile the main people GNOME classic is not the same as a fallback mode. writing code are not the community. Meanwhile MATE is lighter weight than Gnome 2.3, has numerous bug fixes, will have full support for systems/logind.. Something even Gnome 3 still has trouble with. MATE did not have that much development, nor that many developers if you compare it to the amount of work done between a GNOME 2.x release. Could you reference the bugs that GNOME 3 has problems with systemd? Because it works fine for me. Is it really that scary for you guys to think about something else besides Gnome 3 and KDE? Not enough support? Then step up and quit whining. You know how to help, Red Hat employees. Don't be selfish. This is Fedora not RHEL. This is a community based distribution not Red Hats playground. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. I suggest you actually do some work instead of showing that you dislike Red Hat employees. Everyone loves to dance around the fact about what Fedora is or isn't. This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003. Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like it. Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are less people using Fedora. You say projects: which projects exactly? And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press coverage in Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last 30 days. It hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda 18. You are on serious drugs if you believe that. serious drugs Quit with attacking people, then maybe people will actually listen. At the moment you are very vague and unspecific (e.g. bug references, not vague claims). The only think you make clear is that you're angry. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:36:22AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote: On Tuesday, January 29, 2013, Olav Vitters wrote: MATE developers actually have GNOME git accounts now. I know that. GNOME classic is not the same as a fallback mode. I am skeptical. That is not what I meant. Fallback was due to the lack of hardware accelleration. It could be changed into something with a panel. Classic provides a few small changes to change the workflow to more match what GNOME 2 did. MATE did not have that much development, nor that many developers if you compare it to the amount of work done between a GNOME 2.x release. Paid full time employees vs non paid hobbyists. For one: I'd like to see your comparison. There are loads of people contributing to GNOME. It is translated to 40-50 languages, almost all of that work is done by volunteers. Secondly: You suggested that MATE received a lot of work. Now it seems you agree with my assertion that GNOME did way more work. Could you reference the bugs that GNOME 3 has problems with systemd? Because it works fine for me. You know how search RHBZ? You're being vague. You said that MATE has better support than GNOME 3. Please stay on topic and provide references. Note that my intention is to get such issues fixed upstream. You said you don't feel heard by GNOME, but I am specifically asking what troubles you see with GNOME 3 and systemd. This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003. Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like it. Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are less people using Fedora. You say projects: which projects exactly? I noticed you did not respond to this. serious drugs Quit with attacking people, then maybe people will actually listen. At the moment you are very vague and unspecific (e.g. bug references, not vague claims). The only think you make clear is that you're angry. Nobody has been listening for the last 3 years. I've seen the changes that various GNOME developers as well as Red Hat employees have made. I've seen GNOME developers trying to understand issues and make changes. I've even tried to summarize this in various release notes. Now I'm not sure who you mean with nobody. I assume Red Hat employees working on GNOME. In which case that's factually wrong. More importantly: Not feeling heard is no excuse for attacking people. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Replace MySQL with MariaDB
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 12:43:02PM -0500, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: We would like to replace MySQL with MariaDB in early development cycle for Fedora 19. MySQL will continue to be available for at least one release, but MariaDB will become the default. Also, we do not intend to support concurrent installation of both packages on the same machine; pick one or the other. FYI, Mageia has replaced MySQL with MariaDB already. Initially the plan was to allow for both during a release, but as no issues were found it was easier to just support only one thing. Obviously, Fedora has a way larger install base (more things to go wrong, etc) and I imagine Fedora is also used on way more servers, but maybe interesting to know the experience of another distribution. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 02:27:42PM -0500, Máirín Duffy wrote: On Mon 28 Jan 2013 02:17:29 PM EST, Michael Cronenworth wrote: Going away isn't the correct phrase. The UI of Fallback Mode is going to transition to a new feature called Classic Mode. It's an official feature of Gnome 3.8. http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/ Won't the new GNOME 3 classic mode effectively render Cinnamon, MATE, and friends obsolete? It is not enough for all. Various people want the 2.32 version of e.g. gnome-control-center and so on. This is partly why MATE became popular despite that you could get the 2.x gnome-applets+gnome-panel experience under fallback mode (didn't take much effort, but seemed like it was too difficult to discover or something). -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Where are we going? (Not a rant)
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 05:12:27AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote: For example, the same thing happened with Gnome 3 upstream where a lot of developers left the project due to a lack of a real vision or direction. Please don't rely in rant-like blog posts for your source of information. In my impression there are more developers involved in GNOME 3 than ever before. If you say that developers left, please state their names. I've seen 2 names listed in some blog post before. Those 2 developers were still active (and, yeah, they said so) :P Could you also not top post (quoting inline is common practice in most mailing lists)? -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Where are we going? (Not a rant)
On Sat, Dec 08, 2012 at 05:31:54PM +0100, Michael Scherer wrote: I would also add that if the switch to gnome 3 made enough people leave the project, they would have gone to mate, and afaik, no one coding on mate has a @gnome.org email. In fact, mate do take a lot of commits from gnome : Some additional information in case anyone cares: I heard that there are 5 or so MATE developers. Two of which have taken over a GNOME module (gnome-main-menu) as of last week or so. Meaning: they have maintainer (which is different from just developer status). As a result, these two maintainers have GNOME git accounts plus they can approve git accounts for other people. I've explicitly said to them that they it is fine to do so (grant git accounts) for all other MATE developers (obviously not limited to MATE). X vs Y vs Z (e.g. GNOME/MATE/XFCE) discussions are boring. :P -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Anaconda is totally trashing the F18 schedule (was Re: f18: how to install into a LVM partitions (or RAID))
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:54:22AM +, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson wrote: Lack of communication lol those RH storage developers could have. A) subscribed to the Anaconda developers list to monitor changes relevant to their setup as anyone else affected by any upstream changes ( this got mentioned in August ) B) bothered to do a simple test install of alpha they would have noticed that the installer did not default to LVM partition layout by default and had that discussion then and there... Not trying to lay blame, but if something major changes, it is nice to almost over communicate and ensure everyone is really aware of the impact. E.g. this example: maybe everything worked the same for the storage team for all Fedora release cycles. Or at least that any change was directed by that team. If a major change happens, I'd be happy if everyone figures that out on their own, but think it is better if you don't expect that. Quite easy to miss a few emails or not properly read a few for instance. I sometimes completely forget about something major. As said, not trying to lay blame, just giving suggestions / different perspective. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: What are reasonable blockers for making journald the default logger in F19?
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 10:25:11AM -0700, les wrote: Also one of the things we (linux folk) decry about most proprietary packages is in fact the arbitrary encoding of information in proprietary formats. Add in the fact that storage is relatively cheap today, and it would seem that having all logs in text to simplify reading, access, support and legacy storage would be most desirable. Additionally text logs compress nicely for archival storage. The binary format provides various benefits, such as - faster - easier to 'grep' (way more advanced stuff is available) A text format is provided by running journalctl. You can pipe this do a file and have the exact same information. Additionally, you can still run syslog and get everything like you have it as now. IMO this addresses every concern, right? -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Ubuntu Unity has been ported to Fedora 17
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 09:20:59PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote: + 043_ubuntu_menu_proxy.patch ( to export menus through DBus, this one is still used, and if I understood correctly, this is currently the only remnant of non-upstreamed patches and I believe it was declined by GTK+ upstream, to be confirmed in the next days ) I thought the work that went into GTK+ 3.4 (GMenu) should allow Unity to use that functionality instead of any patches. Not 100% sure on this. It does require that GTK+ applications make use of GMenu (and only a few do). Usually when GMenu support is added you see some new entries under the application icon (next to Activities). -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [HEADS-UP] Rawhide: /tmp is now on tmpfs
On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 08:44:38AM -0500, Michael Cronenworth wrote: Matthias Clasen wrote: Its not his ignorance - he's on vacation for the next two weeks... Brian replied to Lennart 7 minutes after Lennart's e-mail and mine was an hour after that as a pretty good indication Lennart was not going to reply. Unless the timing was coincidental of him packing his bags, I'm still sticking with my post. Expecting and more or less demanding a reply after calling someone ignorant... not nice behaviour. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Managing the GNOME updates in Fedora
On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 12:49:32PM +0100, Richard Hughes wrote: On 26 March 2012 11:58, Peter Robinson pbrobin...@gmail.com wrote: It would be nice if the rawhide stream was built at the same time as well as not doing so has the effect of people trying to work with rawhide as well get random failures and in the process of building F-17 and rawhide on ARM a non insignificant number of gnome packages have newer builds in F-16 than they do in both rawhide and F-17 that I've ended up having to fix. Yes, this is a valid critisism. I'm hoping to write a tool to automatically update GNOME builds in a stable release and in rawhide (that watches ftp-release list), rather than having to do it all manually. If you want ideas: http://svnweb.mageia.org/soft/mga-gnome/trunk/mga-gnome?view=markup Though note that Mageia packages per .so library version, so any bumps = breakage (on purpose, goes in another package) Also, if you need more information on ftp.gnome.org or in ftp-release-list: http://git.gnome.org/browse/sysadmin-bin/tree/ftpadmin Still want: - One (preferably json) file on ftp.gnome.org containing all latest versions of all modules. Problem is that master.gnome.org uses NFS and bit worried about how to update such a file nicely. - An RSS feed again (apparently there is some django module which makes this easy; needs to be available for RHEL6/EPEL6). -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: /usrmove?
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 01:11:06AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Yes, I'm arguing that the feature is undesirable by design and should not have been approved, not for Fedora 17, not for Fedora 18, not even for Fedora 31337. It has been approved, other distributions are following. It is very clear you do not want this. But at the same time, it is happening in Fedora and elsewhere (noticed openSUSE, will propose for Mageia 3). I don't think additional emails will change anything about either the feature, or your opinion. In any case, when painting I like the colour white. Though maybe in summer (slightly warmer times), I'll change my mind and choose purple. ;) -- Regards, Olav (lurking:) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: /usrmove?
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 08:07:11AM -0500, Steve Clark wrote: On 02/10/2012 05:28 AM, Olav Vitters wrote: On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 01:11:06AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: Yes, I'm arguing that the feature is undesirable by design and should not have been approved, not for Fedora 17, not for Fedora 18, not even for Fedora 31337. It has been approved, other distributions are following. It is very Hmmm... a google search of linux distributions implementing usrmove only turned up Fedora related links. I talked to people at FOSDEM (regarding systemd, /usr, etc). As mentioned, openSUSE is watching closely (but will wait until Fedora solves the pain). Furthermore, likely Mageia 3 (2 is not out). Regarding your Google query, I don't expect linux distributions to help you much. Quick query gives you: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-factory/2011-11/msg01398.html Lots of good feedback. Initial emails are all really positive. But, IMO, often easier to ask the people who make things happen (FOSDEM, etc). -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Bad coding practices in Fedora packages
On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 09:17:16AM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: ~ without recurse, and standard XDG directories in ~ with recurse. In ~/Documents I have 4GiB of mostly .c source files in various revisions, for a total of 189833 files. In other directories I have 5 photos in .jpg, and couple of manuals in PDF format. After about two or three hours of IO after login I noticed ~/.cache/tracker/meta.db-wal had grown to 31GiB. At this point I killed tracker processes, removed this file and disabled tracker for this session. This was all on 5400 RPM 2,5 laptop drive. So it was very likely indexing those .c files right? Could you file a tracker bug about this? Going from 4GiB to 31+GiB is weird. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Bad coding practices in Fedora packages
On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 05:47:11PM +0100, Tomasz Torcz wrote: Also, 30 GiB in .cache/tracker is a bit extreme when rest of my ~ is 4 GiB. Tracker should only index a few standard directories ($HOME without subdirectories, ~/Documents, etc). What does it index on your machine? Is that the default F16 config? -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Bad package selection practices in Fedora packages
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:09:07PM +0900, Joel Rees wrote: I suppose I have to go to the gnome lists and raise Cain about this kind of fundamental mis-engineering? If you want bugs to be fixed, then please file bugreports. Tracker should NOT have a noticeable impact on performance (in the default config). Of course it'll have some measurable impact, but if you can notice the impact in the default configuration, then something is wrong. From what I understood (before GNOME 3.0), tracker was changed so the performance impact is not noticeable. E.g. I have tracker running but I don't notice the impact of it. I do not have an SSD. I think I missed that other thread about misusing the kernel, so have to read up on what was said there. PS: Didn't know the term raise Cain, but if you mean: To be 'raising Cain' is to be causing trouble or creating an uproar. Don't do above @ GNOME, would only cause you to be banned. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: what if native systemd service is slower than old sysvinit script?
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 05:17:43PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote: True. As far as GNOME goes, though, whenever you suggest 'bulletproof session management', they say 'that's what suspend is for'... I'd like to see proper session management. However, the existing X protocol is terrible (a KDE'er talked about the horrors @ Desktop Summit), and session management itself is really difficult. -- Regards, Olav (a GNOMEr:) -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: systemd: Is it wrong? - wrong order
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 07:50:58PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: On Mon, 11.07.11 13:20, Steve Dickson (ste...@redhat.com) wrote: they are handling the systemd conversation... What other distro are planing to use it? I lost track of this a bit, but MeeGo already switched, and Mandriva did too afair. OpenSUSE will switch in the coming release. + next Mageia will have it (version 2) Gentoo, Debian, Arch have it in the disro, but not default. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: GNOME3 and au revoir WAS: systemd: please stop trying to take over the world :)
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 01:22:25PM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: gnome3 was not driven by user feedbak. It was driven by getting vendors to install it on factory shipped netbooks. Latter is not true. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: systemd: please stop trying to take over the world :)
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 01:42:42PM +0200, Denys Vlasenko wrote: (anything they could do in shell scripts, but not they can't). This will feel good, right? You will be such an important guy! I think most lurkers have understood you seem to have some personal issues with Lennart. Please still show some respect or continue in private please. -- Regards, Olav -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
