Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

Ed Hewitt makes some very good points , Something to look at would be the
Fluxbuntu project the 7.10 Version was amazing because it was very very slim
nothing except the essentials installed but it also retained the
availability of all those other apps by using the official repositories. I
don't think anyone has to worry about something missing because the people
that would be drawn to Lubuntu would certinaly be savvy enough to fetch it
for themselves.

What's good isn't always golden , I agree with the minilmist idea that Ed
Hewitt proposed here.

Cheers!.

Dallas Wiebelhaus.





On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Ed Hewitt wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm Ed Hewitt (chewit in IRC). I have just joined the Lubuntu team in
> Launchpad, I am very keen to give you help with the Lubuntu project. I have
> been using Xubuntu since 7.10 release, and over the years Xubuntu has been
> getting heavier and slower after each release. This has been down two
> things. First, the Ubuntu developers adding more applications and utilies to
> improve the usability of the operating system. Secondly, Xubuntu is just
> Ubuntu with Xfce 'bolted on'. No thought has gone into using as little gnome
> depencies as possible. These two points have made Xubuntu heavy and slow,
> and not a lightweight distro. It is very close to being as heavy as Ubuntu!
>
> My worry with the Lubuntu project is that when it becomes an official
> Ubuntu distro, it will have loads of extra apps added which will make it
> slow and heavy like Xubuntu. It will be a waste your time creating a distro
> which went the same way as Xubuntu. I am writing this message to warn you
> that it could happen. I want to join the Lubuntu and help decide the best
> applications to add to the operating systems and ways to make it as light as
> possible.
>
> I have looked at the Lubuntu application list and I am already concerned
> with the success of the project. It appears Lubuntu will have more
> applications installed than the Ubuntu install!
>
> The best way I see Lubuntu being setup is to carefully follow the way
> Debian is created, since Debain is very lightweight. I believe it is best to
> use the Ubuntu minimal install with LXDE added on, then we add a carefully
> selection of applications. Such as:
>
>
>- Web browser - Firefox
>- Email - Claws
>- Chat - Pidgin, Xchat
>- Office - Abiword, Gnumeric, ePDF
>- Media - Totem, Rhythmbox (would like to use VLC, but it uses QT4)
>- GIMP
>- Synaptic & Update Manager is a must
>- Gnome network manager (need good network support, however it needs to
>start on boot up)
>- Some Xfce apps - Notifyd (very nice notification system), taskmanager
>(but could use lxde task), power manager
>
> We want to keep the apps list small, basic apps which most people will use.
> Video editing, ftp clients and programming apps are not needed on the base
> install. If we add loads of apps, we will be a heavy distro. With Lubuntu
> its performance and lightweight first, sadly xubuntu forgot about that.
>
> Would like to hear what the whole team thinks and if I can be some help in
> the development of Lubuntu.
>
> --
> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[jon york]

Hi guys, completely agree with all of this, but first i think is to determine 
what we want our market to be. Do we want to be out of the box, forget about 
needed to install something to make it "usable" (ie: flash, codecs) or do we 
want to be a bare minimum speedy OS. either way, i like both ideas, but we do 
need to determine what we wish to be and go for it. Il admit, i am ignorant of 
the rules or objectives we need to meet to be a ubuntu derivative, and we must 
adhere to that, But Mr. Ed Hewitt brings up some very valid points,

I have been selling linux based computers for years now, and I have a good idea 
of what people want either way.

Jon York



From: wiebelh...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:49:44 -0500
To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &   
Slow)

Ed Hewitt makes some very good points , Something to look at would be the 
Fluxbuntu project the 7.10 Version was amazing because it was very very slim 
nothing except the essentials installed but it also retained the availability 
of all those other apps by using the official repositories. I don't think 
anyone has to worry about something missing because the people that would be 
drawn to Lubuntu would certinaly be savvy enough to fetch it for themselves.



What's good isn't always golden , I agree with the minilmist idea that Ed 
Hewitt proposed here.

Cheers!.

Dallas Wiebelhaus.





On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Ed Hewitt  
wrote:


Hi,

I'm Ed Hewitt (chewit in IRC). I have just joined the Lubuntu team in 
Launchpad, I am very keen to give you help with the Lubuntu project. I have 
been using Xubuntu since 7.10 release, and over the years Xubuntu has been 
getting heavier and slower after each release. This has been down two things. 
First, the Ubuntu developers adding more applications and utilies to improve 
the usability of the operating system. Secondly, Xubuntu is just Ubuntu with 
Xfce 'bolted on'. No thought has gone into using as little gnome depencies as 
possible. These two points have made Xubuntu heavy and slow, and not a 
lightweight distro. It is very close to being as heavy as Ubuntu!




My worry with the Lubuntu project is that when it becomes an official Ubuntu 
distro, it will have loads of extra apps added which will make it slow and 
heavy like Xubuntu. It will be a waste your time creating a distro which went 
the same way as Xubuntu. I am writing this message to warn you that it could 
happen. I want to join the Lubuntu and help decide the best applications to add 
to the operating systems and ways to make it as light as possible.




I have looked at the Lubuntu application list and I am already concerned with 
the success of the project. It appears Lubuntu will have more applications 
installed than the Ubuntu install!

The best way I see Lubuntu being setup is to carefully follow the way Debian is 
created, since Debain is very lightweight. I believe it is best to use the 
Ubuntu minimal install with LXDE added on, then we add a carefully selection of 
applications. Such as:




Web browser - FirefoxEmail - ClawsChat - Pidgin, Xchat
Office - Abiword, Gnumeric, ePDFMedia - Totem, Rhythmbox (would like to use 
VLC, but it uses QT4)GIMP


Synaptic & Update Manager is a mustGnome network manager (need good network 
support, however it needs to start on boot up)
Some Xfce apps - Notifyd (very nice notification system), taskmanager (but 
could use lxde task), power manager


We want to keep the apps list small, basic apps which most people will use. 
Video editing, ftp clients and programming apps are not needed on the base 
install. If we add loads of apps, we will be a heavy distro. With Lubuntu its 
performance and lightweight first, sadly xubuntu forgot about that. 




Would like to hear what the whole team thinks and if I can be some help in the 
development of Lubuntu.

-- 
www.edhewitt.co.uk




___

Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net

Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[David Sugar]

I agree that xubuntu is not lightweight and app selection is key to
this, especially for those that will always execute.  I think something
like connman or wics would be a better choice than network manager for
Lubuntu.  The gnome power management stuff I recall is already
undergoing a radical size reduction, so that issue may solve itself.

jon york wrote:
> Hi guys, completely agree with all of this, but first i think is to
> determine what we want our market to be. Do we want to be out of the
> box, forget about needed to install something to make it "usable" (ie:
> flash, codecs) or do we want to be a bare minimum speedy OS. either way,
> i like both ideas, but we do need to determine what we wish to be and go
> for it. Il admit, i am ignorant of the rules or objectives we need to
> meet to be a ubuntu derivative, and we must adhere to that, But Mr. Ed
> Hewitt brings up some very valid points,
> 
> I have been selling linux based computers for years now, and I have a
> good idea of what people want either way.
> 
> Jon York
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: wiebelh...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:49:44 -0500
> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy
> & Slow)
> 
> Ed Hewitt makes some very good points , Something to look at would be
> the Fluxbuntu project the 7.10 Version was amazing because it was very
> very slim nothing except the essentials installed but it also retained
> the availability of all those other apps by using the official
> repositories. I don't think anyone has to worry about something missing
> because the people that would be drawn to Lubuntu would certinaly be
> savvy enough to fetch it for themselves.
> 
> What's good isn't always golden , I agree with the minilmist idea that
> Ed Hewitt proposed here.
> 
> Cheers!.
> 
> Dallas Wiebelhaus.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Ed Hewitt
> mailto:edwardahew...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I'm Ed Hewitt (chewit in IRC). I have just joined the Lubuntu team
> in Launchpad, I am very keen to give you help with the Lubuntu
> project. I have been using Xubuntu since 7.10 release, and over the
> years Xubuntu has been getting heavier and slower after each
> release. This has been down two things. First, the Ubuntu developers
> adding more applications and utilies to improve the usability of the
> operating system. Secondly, Xubuntu is just Ubuntu with Xfce 'bolted
> on'. No thought has gone into using as little gnome depencies as
> possible. These two points have made Xubuntu heavy and slow, and not
> a lightweight distro. It is very close to being as heavy as Ubuntu!
> 
> My worry with the Lubuntu project is that when it becomes an
> official Ubuntu distro, it will have loads of extra apps added which
> will make it slow and heavy like Xubuntu. It will be a waste your
> time creating a distro which went the same way as Xubuntu. I am
> writing this message to warn you that it could happen. I want to
> join the Lubuntu and help decide the best applications to add to the
> operating systems and ways to make it as light as possible.
> 
> I have looked at the Lubuntu application list and I am already
> concerned with the success of the project. It appears Lubuntu will
> have more applications installed than the Ubuntu install!
> 
> The best way I see Lubuntu being setup is to carefully follow the
> way Debian is created, since Debain is very lightweight. I believe
> it is best to use the Ubuntu minimal install with LXDE added on,
> then we add a carefully selection of applications. Such as:
> 
> * Web browser - Firefox
> * Email - Claws
> * Chat - Pidgin, Xchat
> * Office - Abiword, Gnumeric, ePDF
> * Media - Totem, Rhythmbox (would like to use VLC, but it uses QT4)
> * GIMP
> * Synaptic & Update Manager is a must
> * Gnome network manager (need good network support, however it
>   needs to start on boot up)
> * Some Xfce apps - Notifyd (very nice notification system),
>   taskmanager (but could use lxde task), power manager
> 
> We want to keep the apps list small, basic apps which most people
> will use. Video editing, ftp clients and programming apps are not
> needed on the base install. If we add loads of apps, we will be a
> heavy distro. With Lubuntu its performance and lightweight first,
> sadly xubuntu forgot about that.
> 
> Wo

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

Also we could learn a allot from the puppy project they have already banged
out years of learning the hardway! And today they have the quintessential
light weight desktop of out of the box that can run on anything after a 486.


On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Ed Hewitt wrote:

> I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
> problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
> Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
>
> By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a lightweight
> distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience, as long as
> we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such as
> synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
> chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
> Its all about getting the right balance.
>
> Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points. It
> would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could be
> Lubuntu's first release
>
> --
> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[David Sugar]

Related to this question is what to do with what is currently the
separate lxde blueprint in Launchpad:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktop

I would be happy to see about transferring it to the Lubuntu Team if the
Lubuntu team does wish to formally take it over...

In any case, yes, I also think the key is finding the right reasonable
mix.

Ed Hewitt wrote:
> I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
> problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
> Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
> 
> By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a
> lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box
> experience, as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic
> utilities (such as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web
> browser, office apps, chat, media player). we can still achieve a user
> friend lightweight distro. Its all about getting the right balance.
> 
> Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points.
> It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic.
> Could be Lubuntu's first release
> 
> -- 
> www.edhewitt.co.uk 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
begin:vcard
fn:David Sugar
n:Sugar;David
org:Canonical
adr:;;United States
email;internet:david.su...@canonical.com
title:Mobile Developer
tel;work:+1 609 465 5336
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.canonical.com
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

Good eye there David!

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:15 PM, David Sugar wrote:

> Related to this question is what to do with what is currently the
> separate lxde blueprint in Launchpad:
>
>
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+spec/mobile-karmic-lxde-ubuntu-desktop
>
> I would be happy to see about transferring it to the Lubuntu Team if the
> Lubuntu team does wish to formally take it over...
>
> In any case, yes, I also think the key is finding the right reasonable
> mix.
>
> Ed Hewitt wrote:
> > I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
> > problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
> > Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
> >
> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
> >
> > By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a
> > lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box
> > experience, as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic
> > utilities (such as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web
> > browser, office apps, chat, media player). we can still achieve a user
> > friend lightweight distro. Its all about getting the right balance.
> >
> > Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points.
> > It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic.
> > Could be Lubuntu's first release
> >
> > --
> > www.edhewitt.co.uk 
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> > ___
> > Mailing list: 
> > https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> > Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> > Unsubscribe : 
> > https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[AdamBOT]

I've been looking at the VLC build flags, and it looks like it is possible
to be compiled without the qt4 dependencies.  Wouldn't that make it a viable
solution as a media player?

I am looking more into it...

Adam

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus wrote:

> Also we could learn a allot from the puppy project they have already banged
> out years of learning the hardway! And today they have the quintessential
> light weight desktop of out of the box that can run on anything after a 486.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Ed Hewitt 
> wrote:
>
>> I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
>> problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
>> Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
>> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
>>
>> By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a lightweight
>> distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience, as long as
>> we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such as
>> synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
>> chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
>> Its all about getting the right balance.
>>
>> Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points. It
>> would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could be
>> Lubuntu's first release
>>
>> --
>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


-- 
><)))*>  Embrace Eternity <*(((><
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

Yes it would and it's very small , minuscule foot print but very very
powerful and modern.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:48 PM, AdamBOT  wrote:

> I've been looking at the VLC build flags, and it looks like it is possible
> to be compiled without the qt4 dependencies.  Wouldn't that make it a viable
> solution as a media player?
>
> I am looking more into it...
>
> Adam
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus 
> wrote:
>
>> Also we could learn a allot from the puppy project they have already
>> banged out years of learning the hardway! And today they have the
>> quintessential light weight desktop of out of the box that can run on
>> anything after a 486.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Ed Hewitt 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
>>> problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
>>> Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
>>> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
>>>
>>> By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a
>>> lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience,
>>> as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such
>>> as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
>>> chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
>>> Its all about getting the right balance.
>>>
>>> Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points.
>>> It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could
>>> be Lubuntu's first release
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ><)))*>  Embrace Eternity <*(((><
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[AdamBOT]

Sorry for such a quick followup, but i found that in the current ubuntu
repos there is vlc-nox  There is also a gvlc project (
http://www.ohloh.net/p/gvlc)  that is a gtk frontend for vlc -- this was in
dapper but is no longer available in our repos, but i think it is definitely
something we need to give a hard look at.

Adam

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:48 PM, AdamBOT  wrote:

> I've been looking at the VLC build flags, and it looks like it is possible
> to be compiled without the qt4 dependencies.  Wouldn't that make it a viable
> solution as a media player?
>
> I am looking more into it...
>
> Adam
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 5:01 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus 
> wrote:
>
>> Also we could learn a allot from the puppy project they have already
>> banged out years of learning the hardway! And today they have the
>> quintessential light weight desktop of out of the box that can run on
>> anything after a 486.
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 4:52 PM, Ed Hewitt 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
>>> problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
>>> Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
>>> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
>>>
>>> By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a
>>> lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience,
>>> as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such
>>> as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
>>> chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
>>> Its all about getting the right balance.
>>>
>>> Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points.
>>> It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could
>>> be Lubuntu's first release
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ><)))*>  Embrace Eternity <*(((><
>



-- 
><)))*>  Embrace Eternity <*(((><
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Andrew Woodhead]

OpenOffice in my opinion is far too bulky for a lightweight distro.

0 upgraded, 44 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 123MB of archives.
After this operation, 412MB of additional disk space will be used.

Its just stupidly fat and bloated and doesn't fit with the ethos of Lubuntu.
0.5Gb for office productivity when gnumeric and abiword use a microscopic
fraction of this.

No way

-Andy



On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Ed Hewitt wrote:

> I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
> problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
> Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
>
> By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a lightweight
> distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience, as long as
> we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such as
> synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
> chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
> Its all about getting the right balance.
>
> Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points. It
> would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could be
> Lubuntu's first release
>
> --
> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

I agree Abiword is so incredibly fast and small and if someone has not tried
it they should give it a spin , it's a brilliant little application! I could
foresee someone adding openoffice if they needed that extra functionality
but for simple out of the box word processing in a small efficient quick
package , abiword can't be beat. We should all take a long hard look at what
other small distributions are doing because they like Puppy have already
pounded these discussions out , I'm not saying to copy but to learn from
from their methodology.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> OpenOffice in my opinion is far too bulky for a lightweight distro.
>
> 0 upgraded, 44 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
> Need to get 123MB of archives.
> After this operation, 412MB of additional disk space will be used.
>
> Its just stupidly fat and bloated and doesn't fit with the ethos of
> Lubuntu. 0.5Gb for office productivity when gnumeric and abiword use a
> microscopic fraction of this.
>
> No way
>
> -Andy
>
>
>
>  On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Ed Hewitt  > wrote:
>
>>  I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
>> problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
>> Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
>> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
>>
>> By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a lightweight
>> distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience, as long as
>> we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such as
>> synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
>> chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
>> Its all about getting the right balance.
>>
>> Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points. It
>> would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could be
>> Lubuntu's first release
>>
>> --
>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Andrew Woodhead]

It's not copying, it is as you say learning from others. OpenOffice just
isn't suitable but will be accessible via reops if you must install it. I
personally only use abiword and know a great many users who have the entire
suite installed and only use the writer. Its laughable.

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Dallas Wiebelhaus wrote:

> I agree Abiword is so incredibly fast and small and if someone has not
> tried it they should give it a spin , it's a brilliant little application! I
> could foresee someone adding openoffice if they needed that extra
> functionality but for simple out of the box word processing in a small
> efficient quick package , abiword can't be beat. We should all take a long
> hard look at what other small distributions are doing because they like
> Puppy have already pounded these discussions out , I'm not saying to copy
> but to learn from from their methodology.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
> andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> OpenOffice in my opinion is far too bulky for a lightweight distro.
>>
>> 0 upgraded, 44 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>> Need to get 123MB of archives.
>> After this operation, 412MB of additional disk space will be used.
>>
>> Its just stupidly fat and bloated and doesn't fit with the ethos of
>> Lubuntu. 0.5Gb for office productivity when gnumeric and abiword use a
>> microscopic fraction of this.
>>
>> No way
>>
>> -Andy
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Ed Hewitt <
>> edwardahew...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
>>> problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
>>> Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
>>> http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php
>>>
>>> By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a
>>> lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box experience,
>>> as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities (such
>>> as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
>>> chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
>>> Its all about getting the right balance.
>>>
>>> Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points.
>>> It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could
>>> be Lubuntu's first release
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

Yep , but Debian LXDE does have the entire open office suite installed and
it weights in at just under 500 megs.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> It's not copying, it is as you say learning from others. OpenOffice just
> isn't suitable but will be accessible via reops if you must install it. I
> personally only use abiword and know a great many users who have the entire
> suite installed and only use the writer. Its laughable.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Dallas Wiebelhaus 
> wrote:
>
>> I agree Abiword is so incredibly fast and small and if someone has not
>> tried it they should give it a spin , it's a brilliant little application! I
>> could foresee someone adding openoffice if they needed that extra
>> functionality but for simple out of the box word processing in a small
>> efficient quick package , abiword can't be beat. We should all take a long
>> hard look at what other small distributions are doing because they like
>> Puppy have already pounded these discussions out , I'm not saying to copy
>> but to learn from from their methodology.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
>> andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OpenOffice in my opinion is far too bulky for a lightweight distro.
>>>
>>> 0 upgraded, 44 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>>> Need to get 123MB of archives.
>>> After this operation, 412MB of additional disk space will be used.
>>>
>>> Its just stupidly fat and bloated and doesn't fit with the ethos of
>>> Lubuntu. 0.5Gb for office productivity when gnumeric and abiword use a
>>> microscopic fraction of this.
>>>
>>> No way
>>>
>>> -Andy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Ed Hewitt <
>>> edwardahew...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
  I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
 problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
 Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
 http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php

 By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a
 lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box 
 experience,
 as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities 
 (such
 as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
 chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
 Its all about getting the right balance.

 Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points.
 It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could
 be Lubuntu's first release

 --
 www.edhewitt.co.uk

 ___
 Mailing list: 
 https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
 Post to :
 Unsubscribe : 
 https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[AdamBOT]

during some of the earlier IRC meetings there was a suggestion made that why
don't we create something along the lines of these are not installed, but
are good apps, ooo would fit in there nicely i believe.

Adam

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:25 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> It's not copying, it is as you say learning from others. OpenOffice just
> isn't suitable but will be accessible via reops if you must install it. I
> personally only use abiword and know a great many users who have the entire
> suite installed and only use the writer. Its laughable.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Dallas Wiebelhaus 
> wrote:
>
>> I agree Abiword is so incredibly fast and small and if someone has not
>> tried it they should give it a spin , it's a brilliant little application! I
>> could foresee someone adding openoffice if they needed that extra
>> functionality but for simple out of the box word processing in a small
>> efficient quick package , abiword can't be beat. We should all take a long
>> hard look at what other small distributions are doing because they like
>> Puppy have already pounded these discussions out , I'm not saying to copy
>> but to learn from from their methodology.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
>> andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> OpenOffice in my opinion is far too bulky for a lightweight distro.
>>>
>>> 0 upgraded, 44 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
>>> Need to get 123MB of archives.
>>> After this operation, 412MB of additional disk space will be used.
>>>
>>> Its just stupidly fat and bloated and doesn't fit with the ethos of
>>> Lubuntu. 0.5Gb for office productivity when gnumeric and abiword use a
>>> microscopic fraction of this.
>>>
>>> No way
>>>
>>> -Andy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Ed Hewitt <
>>> edwardahew...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>
  I think we should go with Firefox. However, OpenOffice would solve the
 problem of having no presentation software if we went with Abiword &
 Gnumeric. We could use these tweaks to speed up OpenOffice. >>>
 http://lifehacker.com/software/optimization/speed-up-openoffice-270775.php

 By going "small", we will achieve the objective of achieving a
 lightweight distro. However, I still think a good out of the box 
 experience,
 as long as we keep it to a minimal. So by having a few basic utilities 
 (such
 as synaptic), need a few must have apps (such as web browser, office apps,
 chat, media player). we can still achieve a user friend lightweight distro.
 Its all about getting the right balance.

 Maybe another Lubuntu IRC Meeting could be useful to discuss my points.
 It would be great to have an application list set in time for Karmic. Could
 be Lubuntu's first release

 --
 www.edhewitt.co.uk

 ___
 Mailing list: 
 https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
 Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
 Unsubscribe : 
 https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
 More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


-- 
><)))*>  Embrace Eternity <*(((><
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[C David Rigby]

On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:



Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
"ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.

I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
"bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.

The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
install. 

More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
mean for the final installed system.

My $0.02.

Cheers
C David Rigby


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Andrew Woodhead]

This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal
install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the
repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the
system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully
installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system
should be slick and quick

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
>
> 
>
> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
>
> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
>
> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
> install.
>
> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
> mean for the final installed system.
>
> My $0.02.
>
> Cheers
> C David Rigby
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on
this DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I
can get.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
> repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
> If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a
> minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed
> off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
> efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the
> system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully
> installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system
> should be slick and quick
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
>> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
>> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
>> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
>>
>> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
>> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
>> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
>> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
>> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
>> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
>>
>> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
>> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
>> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
>> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
>> install.
>>
>> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
>> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
>> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
>> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
>> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
>> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
>> mean for the final installed system.
>>
>> My $0.02.
>>
>> Cheers
>> C David Rigby
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

Stabilized without hiccups at 128mb ram , that's without youtube lagging out
, you can go lower no doubt.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus wrote:

> By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on
> this DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I
> can get.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
> andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
>> repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
>> If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a
>> minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed
>> off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
>> efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the
>> system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully
>> installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system
>> should be slick and quick
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
>>> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
>>> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
>>> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
>>>
>>> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
>>> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
>>> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
>>> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
>>> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
>>> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
>>>
>>> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
>>> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
>>> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
>>> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
>>> install.
>>>
>>> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
>>> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
>>> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
>>> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
>>> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
>>> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
>>> mean for the final installed system.
>>>
>>> My $0.02.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> C David Rigby
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[jon york]

Hi guys, why dont we move this to the forum where it can be easier to document 
and organize these conversations?

also on that topic, in my opinion, we need to divide us into work partners, as 
right now, there is much discussion and no work being done. I think the first 
step, is quite simply that a select few people, who know LXDE and ubuntu the 
best, that they can create a base system that we can work with. this system 
should be very small, and include nothing but the neccesairy files to run lxde 
on ubuntu, as well as synaptic. that way, we can all have the same base system 
to work with, and test things out with.

Jon York



From: wiebelh...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:41:09 -0500
To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &   
Slow)

Stabilized without hiccups at 128mb ram , that's without youtube lagging out , 
you can go lower no doubt.  

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus  wrote:


By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on this 
DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I can get.



On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead 
 wrote:



This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard repos 
can be used to install apps if they are needed.



If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal 
install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the 
repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland efficient 
distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the system with 
the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully installable 
once the installation has completed but the initial base system should be slick 
and quick





On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby  wrote:




On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:







Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between

"ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the

other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to

build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.



I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the

list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks

where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the

possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering

"bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the

FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.



The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable

system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the

real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or

grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to

install.



More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have

yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of

bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system

performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user

could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice

would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they

mean for the final installed system.



My $0.02.



Cheers

C David Rigby





___

Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net

Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp




___

Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net

Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp





___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Dallas Wiebelhaus]

Give me a few days (as the work week is here) And I can get something ready
that we can pass around. That is with the go ahead from the people running
this thing , I was told on IRC that they were still working on something
before releasing an ISO , But in any case now or later I'm willing to do
this.

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:26 PM, jon york  wrote:

> lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Andrew Woodhead]

Can you clarify "create a base system" please. Do you want an Installable
ISO or do you just want a package list that would make it up?

Thanks
-Andy




On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 4:26 AM, jon york  wrote:

>  Hi guys, why dont we move this to the forum where it can be easier to
> document and organize these conversations?
>
> also on that topic, in my opinion, we need to divide us into work partners,
> as right now, there is much discussion and no work being done. I think the
> first step, is quite simply that a select few people, who know LXDE and
> ubuntu the best, that they can create a base system that we can work with.
> this system should be very small, and include nothing but the neccesairy
> files to run lxde on ubuntu, as well as synaptic. that way, we can all have
> the same base system to work with, and test things out with.
>
> Jon York
>
>
>
> --
> From: wiebelh...@gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:41:09 -0500
> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
> Slow)
>
> Stabilized without hiccups at 128mb ram , that's without youtube lagging
> out , you can go lower no doubt.
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Dallas Wiebelhaus 
> wrote:
>
> By the way , Chrome fits in like it's native and is running hella fast on
> this DE on my test box. I'm about to crank the ram down and see how low I
> can get.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
> andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
> repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
> If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a
> minimal install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed
> off the repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
> efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the
> system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully
> installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system
> should be slick and quick
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
>
> 
>
> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
>
> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
>
> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
> install.
>
> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
> mean for the final installed system.
>
> My $0.02.
>
> Cheers
> C David Rigby
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
>
>
> 

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Glen Bizeau]

I agree,

Keep it small and lean, and apt-get anything you need.

The one question I think needs to be answered is " Are we making a
distro for newbies?"

If we are then you will need a bunch of standard default apps... If
not, which I think in my personal experience with Linux and LXDE, this
will probably only be attractive to the more experienced user, who
like myself ends up uninstalling all the crap that comes with Ubuntu
anywayI think it should be mean and lean and if you want
something, go fetch it.

Synaptic should be front and center though, is a launcher so it's easy
ti find. And maybe a desktop document on the default install
explaining about the distro and why it is what it is, and how to get
software.

my two-cents

Glen

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Andrew
Woodhead wrote:
> This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
> repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
> If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal
> install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the
> repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
> efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the
> system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully
> installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system
> should be slick and quick
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby 
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
>> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
>> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
>> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
>>
>> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
>> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
>> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
>> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
>> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
>> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
>>
>> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
>> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
>> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
>> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
>> install.
>>
>> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
>> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
>> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
>> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
>> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
>> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
>> mean for the final installed system.
>>
>> My $0.02.
>>
>> Cheers
>> C David Rigby
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Andrew Woodhead]

I have a small script the guts the system of all the fluff I do not need.
These days I use the minimal ISO and install from the repos what I need. So
much better. My root partitions is currently 2Gb with the desktop + web
browse + vlc + transmission + pidgin + some plugins. Bliss [?]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Glen Bizeau  wrote:

> I agree,
>
> Keep it small and lean, and apt-get anything you need.
>
> The one question I think needs to be answered is " Are we making a
> distro for newbies?"
>
> If we are then you will need a bunch of standard default apps... If
> not, which I think in my personal experience with Linux and LXDE, this
> will probably only be attractive to the more experienced user, who
> like myself ends up uninstalling all the crap that comes with Ubuntu
> anywayI think it should be mean and lean and if you want
> something, go fetch it.
>
> Synaptic should be front and center though, is a launcher so it's easy
> ti find. And maybe a desktop document on the default install
> explaining about the distro and why it is what it is, and how to get
> software.
>
> my two-cents
>
> Glen
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Andrew
> Woodhead wrote:
> > This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
> > repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
> > If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a
> minimal
> > install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off
> the
> > repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
> > efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating
> the
> > system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are
> fully
> > installable once the installation has completed but the initial base
> system
> > should be slick and quick
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
> >> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
> >> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
> >> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
> >>
> >> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
> >> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
> >> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
> >> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
> >> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
> >> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
> >>
> >> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
> >> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
> >> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
> >> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
> >> install.
> >>
> >> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
> >> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
> >> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
> >> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
> >> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
> >> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
> >> mean for the final installed system.
> >>
> >> My $0.02.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> C David Rigby
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Mailing list: 
> >> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> >> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> >> Unsubscribe : 
> >> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> >> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Mailing list: 
> > https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> > Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> > Unsubscribe : 
> > https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >
> >
>
<<360.gif>>___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[jon york]

i agree with c david rigby, in that maybe we can have a barebone system, and 
instead of having installers in the install process, maybe have some meta 
packages in the repo's where a user can download the 'full multimedia desktop' 
or the 'professional office tools' 

Jon York



Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 12:11:37 +0100
From: andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com
To: gbiz...@gmail.com
CC: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &   
Slow)

I have a small script the guts the system of all the fluff I do not need. These 
days I use the minimal ISO and install from the repos what I need. So much 
better. My root partitions is currently 2Gb with the desktop + web browse + vlc 
+ transmission + pidgin + some plugins. Bliss 


On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Glen Bizeau  wrote:

I agree,



Keep it small and lean, and apt-get anything you need.



The one question I think needs to be answered is " Are we making a

distro for newbies?"



If we are then you will need a bunch of standard default apps... If

not, which I think in my personal experience with Linux and LXDE, this

will probably only be attractive to the more experienced user, who

like myself ends up uninstalling all the crap that comes with Ubuntu

anywayI think it should be mean and lean and if you want

something, go fetch it.



Synaptic should be front and center though, is a launcher so it's easy

ti find. And maybe a desktop document on the default install

explaining about the distro and why it is what it is, and how to get

software.



my two-cents



Glen



On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Andrew

Woodhead wrote:

> This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard

> repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.

> If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal

> install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the

> repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland

> efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the

> system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully

> installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system

> should be slick and quick

>

> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby 

> wrote:

>>

>> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:

>>

>> 

>>

>> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between

>> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the

>> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to

>> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.

>>

>> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the

>> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks

>> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the

>> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering

>> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the

>> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.

>>

>> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable

>> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the

>> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or

>> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to

>> install.

>>

>> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have

>> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of

>> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system

>> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user

>> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice

>> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they

>> mean for the final installed system.

>>

>> My $0.02.

>>

>> Cheers

>> C David Rigby

>>

>>

>> ___

>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net

>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

>

>

> ___

> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net

> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop

> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

>

>


<>___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[John Thng]

hi all,

I think lubuntu should not meant for geeks only. It should appeal to the
mass just like ubuntu is for.
As for applications, we should not think too much about the disk space, as
disk space is not very critical less than cpu and ram nowadays, but it's
good to keep it below 2 GB after installation ... And before installation,
things are compressed into livecd, keep it under a livecd rather than
livedvd.

We should look at the memory requirements and cpu utilization more than disk
space.
This is what I saw as lightweight.

As for user friendly, normal users should not configure too much out of box.
It would make the distro unfriendly if the normal users have to configure
like geeks.

I know there are lots of geeks thoughts when designing the distro, but we
should look at the demography of people who will be using it, and which area
of people should we create the distro for, and also we should think more of
the mass, rather than ourselves, it's because we are more experience in
linux, does not mean a normal person who has no experience in linux can
think like us.

Regards
John Thng

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Glen Bizeau  wrote:

> I agree,
>
> Keep it small and lean, and apt-get anything you need.
>
> The one question I think needs to be answered is " Are we making a
> distro for newbies?"
>
> If we are then you will need a bunch of standard default apps... If
> not, which I think in my personal experience with Linux and LXDE, this
> will probably only be attractive to the more experienced user, who
> like myself ends up uninstalling all the crap that comes with Ubuntu
> anywayI think it should be mean and lean and if you want
> something, go fetch it.
>
> Synaptic should be front and center though, is a launcher so it's easy
> ti find. And maybe a desktop document on the default install
> explaining about the distro and why it is what it is, and how to get
> software.
>
> my two-cents
>
> Glen
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Andrew
> Woodhead wrote:
> > This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
> > repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
> > If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a
> minimal
> > install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off
> the
> > repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
> > efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating
> the
> > system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are
> fully
> > installable once the installation has completed but the initial base
> system
> > should be slick and quick
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
> >> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
> >> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
> >> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
> >>
> >> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the
> >> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks
> >> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the
> >> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering
> >> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the
> >> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.
> >>
> >> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable
> >> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the
> >> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or
> >> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to
> >> install.
> >>
> >> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have
> >> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of
> >> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system
> >> performance vs features. It should be organized so that a savvy user
> >> could bypass the explanations (or load a jumpstart script), but a novice
> >> would get a detailed explanation of what the choices are and what they
> >> mean for the final installed system.
> >>
> >> My $0.02.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> C David Rigby
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> >> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> >> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> > Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >
> >
>
> _

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[jon york]

This is where I belive i might be of most help, as i have been selling pc's 
with linux on it for a few years now, to complete newbies in linux, in fact 
they have never heard of linux, I have always created my own remix of ubuntu to 
have the apps they require or need, and in fact, only 5 people of the 136 
people who bought pc's ever called asking how to install something, all the 
others have never needed to install anything since it was already included.

Jon York



Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:47:55 +0800
From: johnthn...@gmail.com
To: gbiz...@gmail.com
CC: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &   
Slow)

hi all,
I think lubuntu should not meant for geeks only. It should appeal to the mass 
just like ubuntu is for.
As for applications, we should not think too much about the disk space, as disk 
space is not very critical less than cpu and ram nowadays, but it's good to 
keep it below 2 GB after installation ... And before installation, things are 
compressed into livecd, keep it under a livecd rather than livedvd.

We should look at the memory requirements and cpu utilization more than disk 
space.This is what I saw as lightweight.
As for user friendly, normal users should not configure too much out of box. It 
would make the distro unfriendly if the normal users have to configure like 
geeks.

I know there are lots of geeks thoughts when designing the distro, but we 
should look at the demography of people who will be using it, and which area of 
people should we create the distro for, and also we should think more of the 
mass, rather than ourselves, it's because we are more experience in linux, does 
not mean a normal person who has no experience in linux can think like us.

RegardsJohn Thng
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Glen Bizeau  wrote:

I agree,



Keep it small and lean, and apt-get anything you need.



The one question I think needs to be answered is " Are we making a

distro for newbies?"



If we are then you will need a bunch of standard default apps... If

not, which I think in my personal experience with Linux and LXDE, this

will probably only be attractive to the more experienced user, who

like myself ends up uninstalling all the crap that comes with Ubuntu

anywayI think it should be mean and lean and if you want

something, go fetch it.



Synaptic should be front and center though, is a launcher so it's easy

ti find. And maybe a desktop document on the default install

explaining about the distro and why it is what it is, and how to get

software.



my two-cents



Glen



On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Andrew

Woodhead wrote:

> This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard

> repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.

> If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a minimal

> install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off the

> repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland

> efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating the

> system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are fully

> installable once the installation has completed but the initial base system

> should be slick and quick

>

> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby 

> wrote:

>>

>> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:

>>

>> 

>>

>> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between

>> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the

>> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to

>> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.

>>

>> I've proposed it before, but I'll say it again as more people are on the

>> list now (sorry that I've missed the IRC meetings for the last two weeks

>> where the app mix has been the topic of discussion). How about the

>> possibility of a very slim base install with the installer offering

>> "bundles" to meet individual needs and desires? Something like the

>> FreeBSD or Debian text installers comes to mind.

>>

>> The base installation would be just a command-line, network-capable

>> system plus enough of X to get LXDE operational. We would be pushing the

>> real work to the installer. The installer, whether text-based or

>> grahpical, would need to provide a lot of choices of bundles to

>> install.

>>

>> More importantly, I think the installer should provide something I have

>> yet to see. That something is extensive documentation of the choices of

>> bundles of applications, and what they mean in terms of system

>> p

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[John Thng]

We should think from the user perspective, rather than the geek perspective.
Barebone is good for geeks and those people who want to customise distro and
put on computers,
Remix is important as it appeal to normal users who will want out of the box
experience.
The success rate for remix will appeal to the general public, while barebone
will appeal to geeks and those who did distro customisation(in which there
might be good unofficial fork in future)
And I will agreed It'll be good if there are both :)

Regards
John

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 8:52 PM, jon york  wrote:

>  This is where I belive i might be of most help, as i have been selling
> pc's with linux on it for a few years now, to complete newbies in linux, in
> fact they have never heard of linux, I have always created my own remix of
> ubuntu to have the apps they require or need, and in fact, only 5 people of
> the 136 people who bought pc's ever called asking how to install something,
> all the others have never needed to install anything since it was already
> included.
>
> Jon York
>
>
>
> --
> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:47:55 +0800
> From: johnthn...@gmail.com
> To: gbiz...@gmail.com
> CC: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
> Slow)
>
> hi all,
>
> I think lubuntu should not meant for geeks only. It should appeal to the
> mass just like ubuntu is for.
> As for applications, we should not think too much about the disk space, as
> disk space is not very critical less than cpu and ram nowadays, but it's
> good to keep it below 2 GB after installation ... And before installation,
> things are compressed into livecd, keep it under a livecd rather than
> livedvd.
>
> We should look at the memory requirements and cpu utilization more than
> disk space.
> This is what I saw as lightweight.
>
> As for user friendly, normal users should not configure too much out of
> box. It would make the distro unfriendly if the normal users have to
> configure like geeks.
>
> I know there are lots of geeks thoughts when designing the distro, but we
> should look at the demography of people who will be using it, and which area
> of people should we create the distro for, and also we should think more of
> the mass, rather than ourselves, it's because we are more experience in
> linux, does not mean a normal person who has no experience in linux can
> think like us.
>
> Regards
> John Thng
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 7:05 PM, Glen Bizeau  wrote:
>
> I agree,
>
> Keep it small and lean, and apt-get anything you need.
>
> The one question I think needs to be answered is " Are we making a
> distro for newbies?"
>
> If we are then you will need a bunch of standard default apps... If
> not, which I think in my personal experience with Linux and LXDE, this
> will probably only be attractive to the more experienced user, who
> like myself ends up uninstalling all the crap that comes with Ubuntu
> anywayI think it should be mean and lean and if you want
> something, go fetch it.
>
> Synaptic should be front and center though, is a launcher so it's easy
> ti find. And maybe a desktop document on the default install
> explaining about the distro and why it is what it is, and how to get
> software.
>
> my two-cents
>
> Glen
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Andrew
> Woodhead wrote:
> > This is kinda surplus, the system is still ubuntu based so the standard
> > repos can be used to install apps if they are needed.
> > If the OS is going to be as it says below, you may as well install a
> minimal
> > install then have a gui to select apps which can then be installed off
> the
> > repos. This however isn't the case, we are trying to make a smalland
> > efficient distro with a decent amount of functionality without bloating
> the
> > system with the likes of evolution, openoffice and firefox. These are
> fully
> > installable once the installation has completed but the initial base
> system
> > should be slick and quick
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 1:14 AM, C David Rigby 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 18:40 +0100, Ed Hewitt and several others wrote:
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >> Restating the obvious, but the engineering trade off is always between
> >> "ease of use/fully featured" on the one hand and lightweight on the
> >> other. The necessary criterion is to decide what we really want to
> >> build, and make it unique and useful enough to attract interest.
> >>
> >> I've proposed it before,

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[jon york]

Good point ed, 

we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.

so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what will be 
the minimum and recommended specs?

Jon York



Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:07:11 +0100
From: edwardahew...@googlemail.com
To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having different 
meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all about lightweight 
distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to have one build, 
lubuntu-desktop.


All we need to do is make sure that this single meta package is bundled with a 
few lightweight apps for the end user to require out of the box which works 
well with the LXDE environment.
-- 
www.edhewitt.co.uk
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Ed Hewitt]

Well, its always difficult to say the system requirements. Xubuntu is
suggesting that they require 192mb RAM for it to be usable. But Xubuntu is
heavy, lubuntu should be far less.

On LXDE website they say this:

   - The hardware requirements of LXDE are similiar to Windows 98 (Maybe a
   little bit higher). An old Pentium II CPU is enough.
   - After X11 and LXDE are started, the total memory usage is about 45 MB
   on i386 machines. (This value may be higher or lower according to different
   system configurations.)
   - Though LXDE itself doesn't require better hardware, other applications
   under X do need it. For example, Firefox and OpenOffice.org 2 are quite
   memory-hungry. So it's recommended that you have a RAM of more than 128 MB.

So going off that, we could safely say that 64mb would be a minimum
requirement and 128mb Recommended. Plus, our heaviest app is likely to be
firefox, that wants 128mb RAM. So by saying that Lubuntu desktop will need
64mb RAM (minimum) and then to run a few apps you will need 128mb
(Recommended).

This is something the team could look at in a virtual machine, "How Low Can
We Go". Try Lubuntu in a VM with 128mb, 64mb, 32mb, 16mb"


2009/6/30 jon york 

>  Good point ed,
>
> we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.
>
> so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what will
> be the minimum and recommended specs?
>
> Jon York
>
>
>
> --
> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:07:11 +0100
> From: edwardahew...@googlemail.com
> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)
>
> I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having
> different meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all about
> lightweight distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to have one
> build, lubuntu-desktop.
>
> All we need to do is make sure that this single meta package is bundled
> with a few lightweight apps for the end user to require out of the box which
> works well with the LXDE environment.
>
> --
> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


-- 
www.edhewitt.co.uk
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Andrew Woodhead]

http://wiki.xfce.org/minimum_requirements

May help to guide

I'd say 300Mhz CPU + 192Mb RAM



On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM, jon york  wrote:

>  Good point ed,
>
> we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.
>
> so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what will
> be the minimum and recommended specs?
>
> Jon York
>
>
>
> --
> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:07:11 +0100
> From: edwardahew...@googlemail.com
> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Subject: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)
>
> I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having
> different meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all about
> lightweight distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to have one
> build, lubuntu-desktop.
>
> All we need to do is make sure that this single meta package is bundled
> with a few lightweight apps for the end user to require out of the box which
> works well with the LXDE environment.
>
> --
> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Ed Hewitt]

I would say LXDE is lighter than Xfce, the LXDE developers seem to think so.
I think 64mb Minimum is enough.

2009/6/30 Andrew Woodhead 

> http://wiki.xfce.org/minimum_requirements
>
> May help to guide
>
> I'd say 300Mhz CPU + 192Mb RAM
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM, jon york  wrote:
>
>>  Good point ed,
>>
>> we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.
>>
>> so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what will
>> be the minimum and recommended specs?
>>
>> Jon York
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:07:11 +0100
>> From: edwardahew...@googlemail.com
>> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Subject: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
>> Slow)
>>
>> I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having
>> different meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all about
>> lightweight distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to have one
>> build, lubuntu-desktop.
>>
>> All we need to do is make sure that this single meta package is bundled
>> with a few lightweight apps for the end user to require out of the box which
>> works well with the LXDE environment.
>>
>> --
>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


-- 
www.edhewitt.co.uk
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Luther Goh Lu Feng]

Hi everyone,

Good to see the sudden spike in mailing list activity. I definitely need time 
to follow the threads.

For those unaware, we have had 3 IRC meetings to discuss the goals and 
applications of Lubuntu. The logs are at 
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC%20Meetings. The objective of the meeting 
was to narrow down the list of applications, and also to decide the goals of 
Lubuntu I urge patience to go through the logs to understand what has 
transpired so far.

I believe the goals of Lubuntu that was decided during that meeting is
that Lubuntu will be a lightweight distro with appropriate
functionality and usability. (Yes, I know that functionality and
usability have subjective meaning).

The list of applications at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/Applications are 
just a list of applications we will choose for inclusion. Generally, only one 
will be included from each application category.

At the meeting, members have decided to include Firefox,
OpenOffice.org, VLC I am not sure if there will be changes following the
discussion on the mailing list. Perhaps this can be discussed in the
next IRC meeting?


>
>From: Ed Hewitt 
>To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:13:47 PM
>Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)
>
>>I would say LXDE is lighter than Xfce, the LXDE developers seem to think so. 
>>I think 64mb Minimum is enough.
>
>
>2009/6/30 Andrew Woodhead 
>
>http://wiki.xfce.org/minimum_requirements
>>
>>May help to guide
>>
>>I'd say 300Mhz CPU + 192Mb RAM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM, jon york  wrote:
>>
>>>>>Good point ed, 
>>>
>>>we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.
>>>
>>>so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what will 
>>>be the minimum and recommended specs?
>>>
>>>Jon York
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:07:11 +0100
>>>From: edwardahew...@googlemail.com
>>>To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>>>>>
>>>Subject: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)
>>>
>>>I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having 
>>>different meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all about 
>>>lightweight distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to have one 
>>>build, lubuntu-desktop.
>>>
>>>All we need to do is make sure that this single meta package is bundled with 
>>>a few lightweight apps for the end user to require out of the box which 
>>>works well with the LXDE environment.
>>>
>>>-- 
>>>www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>>
>>>
>>>___
>>>>>>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>>>>>Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>>>>>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>>>>>More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>>___
>>>>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>>>Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>>>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>>>More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
>
>-- 
>www.edhewitt.co.uk
>


  ___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Glen Bizeau]

Wow,

I just went through the list if apps, Thats a lot of stuff...

Personally, I think it should be lighter than this, but I guess thats
what I get for missing the IRC meeting :)

Will we have a chance to vote on these things? or do the IRC meetings
denote final say?

Glen

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Good to see the sudden spike in mailing list activity. I definitely need
> time to follow the threads.
>
> For those unaware, we have had 3 IRC meetings to discuss the goals and
> applications of Lubuntu. The logs are at
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC%20Meetings. The objective of the meeting
> was to narrow down the list of applications, and also to decide the goals of
> Lubuntu I urge patience to go through the logs to understand what has
> transpired so far.
>
> I believe the goals of Lubuntu that was decided during that meeting is that
> Lubuntu will be a lightweight distro with appropriate functionality and
> usability. (Yes, I know that functionality and usability have subjective
> meaning).
>
> The list of applications at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/Applications are
> just a list of applications we will choose for inclusion. Generally, only
> one will be included from each application category.
>
> At the meeting, members have decided to include Firefox, OpenOffice.org, VLC
> I am not sure if there will be changes following the discussion on the
> mailing list. Perhaps this can be discussed in the next IRC meeting?
>
> From: Ed Hewitt 
> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:13:47 PM
> Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
> Slow)
>
> I would say LXDE is lighter than Xfce, the LXDE developers seem to think so.
> I think 64mb Minimum is enough.
>
> 2009/6/30 Andrew Woodhead 
>>
>> http://wiki.xfce.org/minimum_requirements
>>
>> May help to guide
>>
>> I'd say 300Mhz CPU + 192Mb RAM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM, jon york  wrote:
>>>
>>> Good point ed,
>>>
>>> we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.
>>>
>>> so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what
>>> will be the minimum and recommended specs?
>>>
>>> Jon York
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:07:11 +0100
>>> From: edwardahew...@googlemail.com
>>> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Subject: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
>>> Slow)
>>>
>>> I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having
>>> different meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all about
>>> lightweight distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to have one
>>> build, lubuntu-desktop.
>>>
>>> All we need to do is make sure that this single meta package is bundled
>>> with a few lightweight apps for the end user to require out of the box which
>>> works well with the LXDE environment.
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Ed Hewitt]

I too have the same opinion and in the same situation as Glen. I have missed
out on the meetings, since only being involved in Lubuntu since yesterday. I
have looked at the applications list and there is too many, Lubuntu could
end up too heavy. This is one of the reasons I sent my first email off in
the mailing lists.

2009/7/1 Glen Bizeau 

> Wow,
>
> I just went through the list if apps, Thats a lot of stuff...
>
> Personally, I think it should be lighter than this, but I guess thats
> what I get for missing the IRC meeting :)
>
> Will we have a chance to vote on these things? or do the IRC meetings
> denote final say?
>
> Glen
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng
> wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Good to see the sudden spike in mailing list activity. I definitely need
> > time to follow the threads.
> >
> > For those unaware, we have had 3 IRC meetings to discuss the goals and
> > applications of Lubuntu. The logs are at
> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC%20Meetings. The objective of the
> meeting
> > was to narrow down the list of applications, and also to decide the goals
> of
> > Lubuntu I urge patience to go through the logs to understand what has
> > transpired so far.
> >
> > I believe the goals of Lubuntu that was decided during that meeting is
> that
> > Lubuntu will be a lightweight distro with appropriate functionality and
> > usability. (Yes, I know that functionality and usability have subjective
> > meaning).
> >
> > The list of applications at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/Applicationsare
> > just a list of applications we will choose for inclusion. Generally, only
> > one will be included from each application category.
> >
> > At the meeting, members have decided to include Firefox, OpenOffice.org,
> VLC
> > I am not sure if there will be changes following the discussion on the
> > mailing list. Perhaps this can be discussed in the next IRC meeting?
> >
> > From: Ed Hewitt 
> > To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:13:47 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
> > Slow)
> >
> > I would say LXDE is lighter than Xfce, the LXDE developers seem to think
> so.
> > I think 64mb Minimum is enough.
> >
> > 2009/6/30 Andrew Woodhead 
> >>
> >> http://wiki.xfce.org/minimum_requirements
> >>
> >> May help to guide
> >>
> >> I'd say 300Mhz CPU + 192Mb RAM
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM, jon york  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Good point ed,
> >>>
> >>> we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.
> >>>
> >>> so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what
> >>> will be the minimum and recommended specs?
> >>>
> >>> Jon York
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:07:11 +0100
> >>> From: edwardahew...@googlemail.com
> >>> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> >>> Subject: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
> >>> Slow)
> >>>
> >>> I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having
> >>> different meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all
> about
> >>> lightweight distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to have
> one
> >>> build, lubuntu-desktop.
> >>>
> >>> All we need to do is make sure that this single meta package is bundled
> >>> with a few lightweight apps for the end user to require out of the box
> which
> >>> works well with the LXDE environment.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> Mailing list: 
> >>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> >>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> >>> Unsubscribe : 
> >>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> >>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Mailing list: 
> >> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7El

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Luther Goh Lu Feng]

Just in case, there was any miscommunication, the list just contain possible 
candidates for the application category. For instance, in the web browser 
category, we have midori, epiphany, firefox, kazhakase and some others. But we 
will only choose one, and based on the meetings, we have chosen Firefox for 
functionality and usability reasons. Unfortunately, the meeting members haven't 
gotten around to updating the decision on the choice of applications. It's 
pretty much buried in the logs now AFAIK.

Maybe Mario can give some input as to how we should progress with regards to 
the decision on applications?


>
>From: Ed Hewitt 
>To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2009 1:54:04 AM
>Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)
>
>I too have the same opinion and in the same situation as Glen. I have missed 
>out on the meetings, since only being involved in Lubuntu since yesterday. I 
>have looked at the applications list and there is too many, Lubuntu could end 
>up too heavy. This is one of the reasons I sent my first email off in the 
>mailing lists.
>
>
>2009/7/1 Glen Bizeau 
>
>>>Wow,
>>
>>>>I just went through the list if apps, Thats a lot of stuff...
>>
>>>>Personally, I think it should be lighter than this, but I guess thats
>>>>what I get for missing the IRC meeting :)
>>
>>>>Will we have a chance to vote on these things? or do the IRC meetings
>>>>denote final say?
>>
>>>>Glen
>>
>>>>On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng wrote:
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> Good to see the sudden spike in mailing list activity. I definitely need
>>>>> time to follow the threads.
>>>>>
>>>>> For those unaware, we have had 3 IRC meetings to discuss the goals and
>>>>> applications of Lubuntu. The logs are at
>>>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC%20Meetings. The objective of the 
>>>>> meeting
>>>>> was to narrow down the list of applications, and also to decide the goals 
>>>>> of
>>>>> Lubuntu I urge patience to go through the logs to understand what has
>>>>> transpired so far.
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe the goals of Lubuntu that was decided during that meeting is 
>>>>> that
>>>>> Lubuntu will be a lightweight distro with appropriate functionality and
>>>>> usability. (Yes, I know that functionality and usability have subjective
>>>>> meaning).
>>>>>
>>>>> The list of applications at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/Applications 
>>>>> are
>>>>> just a list of applications we will choose for inclusion. Generally, only
>>>>> one will be included from each application category.
>>>>>
>>>>> At the meeting, members have decided to include Firefox, OpenOffice.org, 
>>>>> VLC
>>>>> I am not sure if there will be changes following the discussion on the
>>>>> mailing list. Perhaps this can be discussed in the next IRC meeting?
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Ed Hewitt 
>>>>> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:13:47 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
>>>>> Slow)
>>>>>
>>>>> I would say LXDE is lighter than Xfce, the LXDE developers seem to think 
>>>>> so.
>>>>> I think 64mb Minimum is enough.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2009/6/30 Andrew Woodhead 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://wiki.xfce.org/minimum_requirements
>>>>>>
>>>>>> May help to guide
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd say 300Mhz CPU + 192Mb RAM
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM, jon york  wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Good point ed,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what
>>>>>>> will be the minimum and recommended specs?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jon York
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>&

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Andrew Woodhead]

/me Grumbles at openoffice and firefox

but if its agreed then its agreed

Will be hitting some CD making if I get chance. Got a big month ahead but
will no doubt try and get something constructive done

Peace


On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Good to see the sudden spike in mailing list activity. I definitely need
> time to follow the threads.
>
> For those unaware, we have had 3 IRC meetings to discuss the goals and
> applications of Lubuntu. The logs are at
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC%20Meetings. The objective of the
> meeting was to narrow down the list of applications, and also to decide the
> goals of Lubuntu I urge patience to go through the logs to understand what
> has transpired so far.
>
> I believe the goals of Lubuntu that was decided during that meeting is that
> Lubuntu will be a lightweight distro with appropriate functionality and
> usability. (Yes, I know that functionality and usability have subjective
> meaning).
>
> The list of applications at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/Applicationsare 
> just a list of applications we will choose for inclusion. Generally,
> only one will be included from each application category.
>
> At the meeting, members have decided to include Firefox, OpenOffice.org,
> VLC I am not sure if there will be changes following the discussion on the
> mailing list. Perhaps this can be discussed in the next IRC meeting?
>
>
> *From:* Ed Hewitt 
> *To:* lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:13:47 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy
> & Slow)
>
> I would say LXDE is lighter than Xfce, the LXDE developers seem to think
> so. I think 64mb Minimum is enough.
>
> 2009/6/30 Andrew Woodhead 
>
>> http://wiki.xfce.org/minimum_requirements
>>
>> May help to guide
>>
>> I'd say 300Mhz CPU + 192Mb RAM
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 3:50 PM, jon york  wrote:
>>
>>>  Good point ed,
>>>
>>> we are forgetting our requirements, and getting head of ourselves.
>>>
>>> so now that we are mostly agreed on being small and lightweight, what
>>> will be the minimum and recommended specs?
>>>
>>> Jon York
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:07:11 +0100
>>> From: edwardahew...@googlemail.com
>>> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Subject: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
>>> Slow)
>>>
>>> I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having
>>> different meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all about
>>> lightweight distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to have one
>>> build, lubuntu-desktop.
>>>
>>> All we need to do is make sure that this single meta package is bundled
>>> with a few lightweight apps for the end user to require out of the box which
>>> works well with the LXDE environment.
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Mailing list: 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
>>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> Unsubscribe : 
>>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Mailing list: 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
>> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> Unsubscribe : 
>> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> www.edhewitt.co.uk
>
>
>
> ___
> Mailing list: 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : 
> https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop<https://launchpad.net/%7Elubuntu-desktop>
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Mario Behling]

Hello everyone,

it is fantastic to see people are joining and have lots of ideas. We
had IRC meet ups in order to have a less time-consuming way to talk to
each other. PCMan and others of the LXDE team took part in those
meetings. Besides that during recent months, we have met up among some
people in person for example in Singapore, Taiwan and Germany.

About applications - decisions are not final, but we had (and have) a
fair bit of discussion about it already.

I believe much depends on the goal we aim for. As I have been around
emerging countries during last years, I developed an idea about what
would be a nice thing to have in those countries. I believe lubuntu
can be a good thing for many people. We need to keep it lightweight,
but at the same time include essential features (that work for the
user group we aim for).

Internet bandwidth in countries like Afghanistan or in African
countries is often very low. So, we need to consider this. Some people
say "you can just download and install applications on top of a
minimum install", in regions with limited bandwidth this is not an
option.

In regards to mobile devices and architectures like ARM and Mips, we
also have to think that new netbooks and other devices are coming out.
They often have low resolutions. I recently saw a netbook with 800x420
screen resolution in China.

So, I think talking about the goal of the distribution is the first
thing to consider and the second step is to talk about single
applications. If an applications fulfills goals well, but at a later
point another application fulfills our goals better, we can switch.

The question now: What is the goal of lubuntu for you? Do you suggest
something else?

All the best,

Mario


On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng wrote:
> Just in case, there was any miscommunication, the list just contain possible
> candidates for the application category. For instance, in the web browser
> category, we have midori, epiphany, firefox, kazhakase and some others. But
> we will only choose one, and based on the meetings, we have chosen Firefox
> for functionality and usability reasons. Unfortunately, the meeting members
> haven't gotten around to updating the decision on the choice of
> applications. It's pretty much buried in the logs now AFAIK.
>
> Maybe Mario can give some input as to how we should progress with regards to
> the decision on applications?
>
> From: Ed Hewitt 
> To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2009 1:54:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
> Slow)
>
> I too have the same opinion and in the same situation as Glen. I have missed
> out on the meetings, since only being involved in Lubuntu since yesterday. I
> have looked at the applications list and there is too many, Lubuntu could
> end up too heavy. This is one of the reasons I sent my first email off in
> the mailing lists.
>
> 2009/7/1 Glen Bizeau 
>>
>> Wow,
>>
>> I just went through the list if apps, Thats a lot of stuff...
>>
>> Personally, I think it should be lighter than this, but I guess thats
>> what I get for missing the IRC meeting :)
>>
>> Will we have a chance to vote on these things? or do the IRC meetings
>> denote final say?
>>
>> Glen
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng
>> wrote:
>> > Hi everyone,
>> >
>> > Good to see the sudden spike in mailing list activity. I definitely need
>> > time to follow the threads.
>> >
>> > For those unaware, we have had 3 IRC meetings to discuss the goals and
>> > applications of Lubuntu. The logs are at
>> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC%20Meetings. The objective of the
>> > meeting
>> > was to narrow down the list of applications, and also to decide the
>> > goals of
>> > Lubuntu I urge patience to go through the logs to understand what has
>> > transpired so far.
>> >
>> > I believe the goals of Lubuntu that was decided during that meeting is
>> > that
>> > Lubuntu will be a lightweight distro with appropriate functionality and
>> > usability. (Yes, I know that functionality and usability have subjective
>> > meaning).
>> >
>> > The list of applications at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/Applications
>> > are
>> > just a list of applications we will choose for inclusion. Generally,
>> > only
>> > one will be included from each application category.
>> >
>> > At the meeting, members have decided to include Firefox, OpenOffice.org,
>> > VLC
>> > I am not sure if there will be changes following the discussion on the
>

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Ed Hewitt]

I agree with mario, I have always believed that Lubuntu needs to come with
some important applications for the end user to be able to use "out of the
box". I believe the goal is to have a distro which can run on very low
requirements which has a great usability with the help of carefully selected
applications for their usefulness and being light.

2009/7/1 Mario Behling 

> Hello everyone,
>
> it is fantastic to see people are joining and have lots of ideas. We
> had IRC meet ups in order to have a less time-consuming way to talk to
> each other. PCMan and others of the LXDE team took part in those
> meetings. Besides that during recent months, we have met up among some
> people in person for example in Singapore, Taiwan and Germany.
>
> About applications - decisions are not final, but we had (and have) a
> fair bit of discussion about it already.
>
> I believe much depends on the goal we aim for. As I have been around
> emerging countries during last years, I developed an idea about what
> would be a nice thing to have in those countries. I believe lubuntu
> can be a good thing for many people. We need to keep it lightweight,
> but at the same time include essential features (that work for the
> user group we aim for).
>
> Internet bandwidth in countries like Afghanistan or in African
> countries is often very low. So, we need to consider this. Some people
> say "you can just download and install applications on top of a
> minimum install", in regions with limited bandwidth this is not an
> option.
>
> In regards to mobile devices and architectures like ARM and Mips, we
> also have to think that new netbooks and other devices are coming out.
> They often have low resolutions. I recently saw a netbook with 800x420
> screen resolution in China.
>
> So, I think talking about the goal of the distribution is the first
> thing to consider and the second step is to talk about single
> applications. If an applications fulfills goals well, but at a later
> point another application fulfills our goals better, we can switch.
>
> The question now: What is the goal of lubuntu for you? Do you suggest
> something else?
>
> All the best,
>
> Mario
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng
> wrote:
> > Just in case, there was any miscommunication, the list just contain
> possible
> > candidates for the application category. For instance, in the web browser
> > category, we have midori, epiphany, firefox, kazhakase and some others.
> But
> > we will only choose one, and based on the meetings, we have chosen
> Firefox
> > for functionality and usability reasons. Unfortunately, the meeting
> members
> > haven't gotten around to updating the decision on the choice of
> > applications. It's pretty much buried in the logs now AFAIK.
> >
> > Maybe Mario can give some input as to how we should progress with regards
> to
> > the decision on applications?
> >
> > From: Ed Hewitt 
> > To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2009 1:54:04 AM
> > Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy &
> > Slow)
> >
> > I too have the same opinion and in the same situation as Glen. I have
> missed
> > out on the meetings, since only being involved in Lubuntu since
> yesterday. I
> > have looked at the applications list and there is too many, Lubuntu could
> > end up too heavy. This is one of the reasons I sent my first email off in
> > the mailing lists.
> >
> > 2009/7/1 Glen Bizeau 
> >>
> >> Wow,
> >>
> >> I just went through the list if apps, Thats a lot of stuff...
> >>
> >> Personally, I think it should be lighter than this, but I guess thats
> >> what I get for missing the IRC meeting :)
> >>
> >> Will we have a chance to vote on these things? or do the IRC meetings
> >> denote final say?
> >>
> >> Glen
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi everyone,
> >> >
> >> > Good to see the sudden spike in mailing list activity. I definitely
> need
> >> > time to follow the threads.
> >> >
> >> > For those unaware, we have had 3 IRC meetings to discuss the goals and
> >> > applications of Lubuntu. The logs are at
> >> > https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/IRC%20Meetings. The objective of the
> >> > meeting
> >> > was to narrow down the list of applications, and also to decide the
> >> > goals of
> >> > Lubuntu I urge patience to g

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Andrew Woodhead]

I think openoffice is a bad choice, you can easily put this into context:

EEEPC 2G comes with a 2Gb internal drive, OpenOffice installed is 500Mb,
that 25% of the entire storage taken up by an office suite.

Not exactly light is it



On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Ed Hewitt wrote:

> I agree with mario, I have always believed that Lubuntu needs to come with
> some important applications for the end user to be able to use "out of the
> box". I believe the goal is to have a distro which can run on very low
> requirements which has a great usability with the help of carefully selected
> applications for their usefulness and being light.
>
> 2009/7/1 Mario Behling 
>
> Hello everyone,
>>
>> it is fantastic to see people are joining and have lots of ideas. We
>> had IRC meet ups in order to have a less time-consuming way to talk to
>> each other. PCMan and others of the LXDE team took part in those
>> meetings. Besides that during recent months, we have met up among some
>> people in person for example in Singapore, Taiwan and Germany.
>>
>> About applications - decisions are not final, but we had (and have) a
>> fair bit of discussion about it already.
>>
>> I believe much depends on the goal we aim for. As I have been around
>> emerging countries during last years, I developed an idea about what
>> would be a nice thing to have in those countries. I believe lubuntu
>> can be a good thing for many people. We need to keep it lightweight,
>> but at the same time include essential features (that work for the
>> user group we aim for).
>>
>> Internet bandwidth in countries like Afghanistan or in African
>> countries is often very low. So, we need to consider this. Some people
>> say "you can just download and install applications on top of a
>> minimum install", in regions with limited bandwidth this is not an
>> option.
>>
>> In regards to mobile devices and architectures like ARM and Mips, we
>> also have to think that new netbooks and other devices are coming out.
>> They often have low resolutions. I recently saw a netbook with 800x420
>> screen resolution in China.
>>
>> So, I think talking about the goal of the distribution is the first
>> thing to consider and the second step is to talk about single
>> applications. If an applications fulfills goals well, but at a later
>> point another application fulfills our goals better, we can switch.
>>
>> The question now: What is the goal of lubuntu for you? Do you suggest
>> something else?
>>
>> All the best,
>>
>> Mario
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng
>> wrote:
>> > Just in case, there was any miscommunication, the list just contain
>> possible
>> > candidates for the application category. For instance, in the web
>> browser
>> > category, we have midori, epiphany, firefox, kazhakase and some others.
>> But
>> > we will only choose one, and based on the meetings, we have chosen
>> Firefox
>> > for functionality and usability reasons. Unfortunately, the meeting
>> members
>> > haven't gotten around to updating the decision on the choice of
>> > applications. It's pretty much buried in the logs now AFAIK.
>> >
>> > Maybe Mario can give some input as to how we should progress with
>> regards to
>> > the decision on applications?
>> >
>> > From: Ed Hewitt 
>> > To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>> > Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2009 1:54:04 AM
>> > Subject: Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy
>> &
>> > Slow)
>> >
>> > I too have the same opinion and in the same situation as Glen. I have
>> missed
>> > out on the meetings, since only being involved in Lubuntu since
>> yesterday. I
>> > have looked at the applications list and there is too many, Lubuntu
>> could
>> > end up too heavy. This is one of the reasons I sent my first email off
>> in
>> > the mailing lists.
>> >
>> > 2009/7/1 Glen Bizeau 
>> >>
>> >> Wow,
>> >>
>> >> I just went through the list if apps, Thats a lot of stuff...
>> >>
>> >> Personally, I think it should be lighter than this, but I guess thats
>> >> what I get for missing the IRC meeting :)
>> >>
>> >> Will we have a chance to vote on these things? or do the IRC meetings
>> >> denote final say?
>> >>
>> >> Glen
>> >>
>> >> On

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[John Thng]

Yes, however, nowadays EeePC 7 inches comes with 4 GB flash. Most emerging
countries might have hard drive more than 2 GB.
For the sake of some old models of netbook(most hard disk will have more
than 2GB), I don't think it's good to sacrifice the importance of
OpenOffice.org in emerging countries and normal users usage. OpenOffice.org
is quite important, especially in low bandwidth environment like developing
countries, it's a need to include. Because it requires a bigger disk space,
does not mean it should not be included because of that.

We should look in a bigger context. There are already distro serving the
needs of the minimal disk space dedicated netbook.

Regards
John Thng

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Andrew Woodhead <
andrew.woodhead...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I think openoffice is a bad choice, you can easily put this into context:
>
> EEEPC 2G comes with a 2Gb internal drive, OpenOffice installed is 500Mb,
> that 25% of the entire storage taken up by an office suite.
>
> Not exactly light is it
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Ed Hewitt wrote:
>
>> I agree with mario, I have always believed that Lubuntu needs to come with
>> some important applications for the end user to be able to use "out of the
>> box". I believe the goal is to have a distro which can run on very low
>> requirements which has a great usability with the help of carefully selected
>> applications for their usefulness and being light.
>>
>> 2009/7/1 Mario Behling 
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> it is fantastic to see people are joining and have lots of ideas. We
>>> had IRC meet ups in order to have a less time-consuming way to talk to
>>> each other. PCMan and others of the LXDE team took part in those
>>> meetings. Besides that during recent months, we have met up among some
>>> people in person for example in Singapore, Taiwan and Germany.
>>>
>>> About applications - decisions are not final, but we had (and have) a
>>> fair bit of discussion about it already.
>>>
>>> I believe much depends on the goal we aim for. As I have been around
>>> emerging countries during last years, I developed an idea about what
>>> would be a nice thing to have in those countries. I believe lubuntu
>>> can be a good thing for many people. We need to keep it lightweight,
>>> but at the same time include essential features (that work for the
>>> user group we aim for).
>>>
>>> Internet bandwidth in countries like Afghanistan or in African
>>> countries is often very low. So, we need to consider this. Some people
>>> say "you can just download and install applications on top of a
>>> minimum install", in regions with limited bandwidth this is not an
>>> option.
>>>
>>> In regards to mobile devices and architectures like ARM and Mips, we
>>> also have to think that new netbooks and other devices are coming out.
>>> They often have low resolutions. I recently saw a netbook with 800x420
>>> screen resolution in China.
>>>
>>> So, I think talking about the goal of the distribution is the first
>>> thing to consider and the second step is to talk about single
>>> applications. If an applications fulfills goals well, but at a later
>>> point another application fulfills our goals better, we can switch.
>>>
>>> The question now: What is the goal of lubuntu for you? Do you suggest
>>> something else?
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Mario
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Luther Goh Lu Feng
>>> wrote:
>>> > Just in case, there was any miscommunication, the list just contain
>>> possible
>>> > candidates for the application category. For instance, in the web
>>> browser
>>> > category, we have midori, epiphany, firefox, kazhakase and some others.
>>> But
>>> > we will only choose one, and based on the meetings, we have chosen
>>> Firefox
>>> > for functionality and usability reasons. Unfortunately, the meeting
>>> members
>>> > haven't gotten around to updating the decision on the choice of
>>> > applications. It's pretty much buried in the logs now AFAIK.
>>> >
>>> > Maybe Mario can give some input as to how we should progress with
>>> regards to
>>> > the decision on applications?
>>> >
>>> > From: Ed Hewitt 
>>> > To: lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, J

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[Ed Hewitt]

Apart from choosing the right applications for the distro, the other thing
we need to think about is background services. Xubuntu major problems is the
amount of background services it has. On a standard install of Xubuntu,
there is about 90 processes when you boot to the desktop for the first time,
in Ubuntu there is 103. On my install of Ubuntu minimal + LXDE there is 85.
It seems quite high compared to Windows XP which is around 20 to 25 and
Windows Vista which is around 40.

There is a problem here which i believe we need to address. I try and solve
the problem by installing BUM and using the services manager in Ubuntu, but
you can only turn on/off about 15-20 services. We need to look into the core
of Ubuntu and see what services are necessary and which ones we can remove.
I am guessing there are some server services which come with ubuntu minimal
which we could remove, since they will be not necessary for a desktop
experience.
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[David Sugar]

This question is also tied to the goal of shortening overall system boot
time for Ubuntu, so I think there is both active work in that area which
may help address this already, and whatever is separately learned here
may well apply to the rest of Ubuntu as well.

Ed Hewitt wrote:
> Apart from choosing the right applications for the distro, the other
> thing we need to think about is background services. Xubuntu major
> problems is the amount of background services it has. On a standard
> install of Xubuntu, there is about 90 processes when you boot to the
> desktop for the first time, in Ubuntu there is 103. On my install of
> Ubuntu minimal + LXDE there is 85. It seems quite high compared to
> Windows XP which is around 20 to 25 and Windows Vista which is around 40.
> 
> There is a problem here which i believe we need to address. I try and
> solve the problem by installing BUM and using the services manager in
> Ubuntu, but you can only turn on/off about 15-20 services. We need to
> look into the core of Ubuntu and see what services are necessary and
> which ones we can remove. I am guessing there are some server services
> which come with ubuntu minimal which we could remove, since they will be
> not necessary for a desktop experience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
begin:vcard
fn:David Sugar
n:Sugar;David
org:Canonical
adr:;;United States
email;internet:david.su...@canonical.com
title:Mobile Developer
tel;work:+1 609 465 5336
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.canonical.com
version:2.1
end:vcard

___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Re: [Lubuntu-desktop] Lubuntu could end up like Xubuntu (Heavy & Slow)

[C David Rigby]

On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 15:07 +0100, Ed Hewitt wrote:
> I believe its a bad idea having different versions of Lubuntu, having
> different meta packages of Lubuntu is not what lubutnu needs. Its all
> about lightweight distro. The Ubuntu guidelines requires the distro to
> have one build, lubuntu-desktop.

That's a good point that I had not considered when I suggested that the
installer might offer multiple meta-packages. Thanks for pointing it
out.

Also: 

On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 10:03 +0200, Mario Behling wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> Internet bandwidth in countries like Afghanistan or in African
> countries is often very low. So, we need to consider this. Some people
> say "you can just download and install applications on top of a
> minimum install", in regions with limited bandwidth this is not an
> option.
> 
> In regards to mobile devices and architectures like ARM and Mips, we
> also have to think that new netbooks and other devices are coming out.
> They often have low resolutions. I recently saw a netbook with 800x420
> screen resolution in China.

Full disclosure: despite my love of Ubuntu, I do not use it everywhere.
If I have a specialized use for a piece of low-resource hardware, I
pick the distro that best fits the requirements. I don't mind working a
bit harder to squeeze out more efficiency. This is not the approach
appropriate for desktop end-users, though. They should not have to
bother, nor need the help of a power user to get set up.

> So, I think talking about the goal of the distribution is the first
> thing to consider and the second step is to talk about single
> applications. If an applications fulfills goals well, but at a later
> point another application fulfills our goals better, we can switch.
> 
> The question now: What is the goal of lubuntu for you? Do you suggest
> something else?


I was thinking about all of this. In a prior project I worked on for a
lightweight GNU/Linux distro, distributing CDs in Africa where there
was little or no network access was one of our goals. Some of the group
actually went to Africa (I forget exactly where) with a van full of
older, donated gear and set up an entire school lab this way.

So, I propose that the goal should be a complete Ubuntu with the
critical apps (Firefox, Open Office) that uses LXDE rather than
GNOME/KDE/Xubuntu. This would better suit the needs of the proposed
users. In other words, in the trade off between lightweight and
complete functionality, I would vote for functionality at the expense
of efficiency.

As well:

On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 17:44 +0100, Ed Hewitt wrote:
> Apart from choosing the right applications for the distro, the other
> thing we need to think about is background services...I try and solve
> the problem by installing BUM and using the services manager in
> Ubuntu, but you can only turn on/off about 15-20 services.

Very good point. As long as we don't deviate from the Ubuntu guidelines,
this is one of the areas where we could optimize effectively without
sacrificing too much end-user functionality. BUM is Perl-GTK2, so
perhaps it or an application we derive from it would be something we
could include in Lubuntu? It does not appear to be part of my Ubuntu
9.04 default installation. This might be a way to provide the user some
control over the trade-off between efficiency and functionality.

Regards
C David Rigby


___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
Post to : lubuntu-desktop@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp