On 10/3/06, Kristian Høgsberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wether or not we want a composited desktop is a different topic, but I
> think the general consensus is that we do, as long as there's an
> option to fall back to a legacy desktop (that is, a non-composited
> desktop).
So does this mean su
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 21:30 -0400, Hubert Figuiere wrote:
> JP Rosevear wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 18:33 -0500, Travis Watkins wrote:
> >> Does compiz work without a 3D card? If not it's worthless as anything
> >> but a power user addon.
> >
> > Very few desktop cards don't have 3D capabilit
On 10/3/06, Travis Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does compiz work without a 3D card? If not it's worthless as anything
> but a power user addon.
This is orthogonal to the compiz vs. metacity discussion. Both
compositors have exactly the same requirements to the underlying stack
(X.org and
Ciao,
Il giorno mar, 03/10/2006 alle 18.33 -0500, Travis Watkins ha scritto:
> Does compiz work without a 3D card? If not it's worthless as anything
> but a power user addon.
This is exactly something I was thinking of a couple hours ago. Maybe
compiz should be able to work EVEN WITHOUT t
JP Rosevear wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 18:33 -0500, Travis Watkins wrote:
>> Does compiz work without a 3D card? If not it's worthless as anything
>> but a power user addon.
>
> Very few desktop cards don't have 3D capabilities,
More than you think: OLPC, thin clients, old machines, etc. May
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 19:54 -0400, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
> > I'm not sure how lisp like configuration equates with something that
> > exposes all its settings in gconf and has a dbus plugin for remote
> > control. gnome-xgl is a settings gui that is fairly generic (except for
> > enabling Xgl on
Em Qua, 2006-10-04 às 01:29 +0200, Chipzz escreveu:
> This is very much not a detail, but the last time I tried compiz (which
> was on ubuntu dapper), it lacked *ALL* of the keybindings to maximize,
> minimize, etc windows. Certainly not a "minor detail".
>
It's quite possible that you tried an e
> I'm not sure how lisp like configuration equates with something that
> exposes all its settings in gconf and has a dbus plugin for remote
> control. gnome-xgl is a settings gui that is fairly generic (except for
> enabling Xgl on suse), although it could use a little UI love.
Compiz may not b
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 18:33 -0500, Travis Watkins wrote:
> Does compiz work without a 3D card? If not it's worthless as anything
> but a power user addon.
Very few desktop cards don't have 3D capabilities, but yes its a
possible issue. There are ways to address it like better software
fallbacks t
Rob Adams wrote:
> Why bother when both the GNOME and KDE projects already have excellent
> window managers? I don't understand this idea of writing a whole new
> window manager just to add eye candy. There's nothing about compositing
> that requires a complete rewrite of the window manager. The
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 01:29 +0200, Chipzz wrote:
> This is very much not a detail, but the last time I tried compiz (which
> was on ubuntu dapper), it lacked *ALL* of the keybindings to maximize,
> minimize, etc windows. Certainly not a "minor detail".
They all work.
-JP
--
JP Rosevear <[EMAIL P
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 18:23 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 14:44 -0400, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Right now both the applet and daemon live in GNOME CVS and are released
> > > together.
> >
> > (I don't think it's important for them to be split, unless you forsee
Does compiz work without a 3D card? If not it's worthless as anything
but a power user addon.
--
Travis Watkins
http://www.realistanew.com
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-de
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 18:53 -0400, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
> > Is there really any objective reason why Compiz shouldn't be at least
> > considered as a potential successor to Metacity?
>
> Because it does not benefit from a long history of development, testing and
> fixes for crucial window manag
This is very much not a detail, but the last time I tried compiz (which
was on ubuntu dapper), it lacked *ALL* of the keybindings to maximize,
minimize, etc windows. Certainly not a "minor detail".
On Tue, 3 Oct 2006, [UTF-8] Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
On 10/3/06, Rob Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 18:53 -0400, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
> > Is there really any objective reason why Compiz shouldn't be at least
> > considered as a potential successor to Metacity?
>
> Because it does not benefit from a long history of development, testing and
> fixes for crucial window manag
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 17:48 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 00:36 +0200, Daniel Borgmann wrote:
> > On 10/3/06, Rob Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Realistically, compiz is unlikely
> > > ever to be accepted by either project, because it's a chimera. So why
> > > are we
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 14:34 -0700, Rob Adams wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 17:25 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> > It would be nice if you could back up these claims with examples of
> > such missing details. Or even better, file bugs so we can get them
> > fixed. There is a component for comp
> Is there really any objective reason why Compiz shouldn't be at least
> considered as a potential successor to Metacity?
Because it does not benefit from a long history of development, testing and
fixes for crucial window management behaviour, and gives everyone terrible,
vomitous flashbacks t
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 00:36 +0200, Daniel Borgmann wrote:
> Why is it a chimera, because the GNOME dependent modules are optional?
> That makes no sense to me. I rather see this as Compiz' biggest
> strength, since it encourages code sharing and cooperation (as well as
> experimentation). Is there
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 00:36 +0200, Daniel Borgmann wrote:
> On 10/3/06, Rob Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Realistically, compiz is unlikely
> > ever to be accepted by either project, because it's a chimera. So why
> > are we dumping so much effort into it?
>
> Why is it a chimera, because
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 12:30 -0400, Robert Love wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 11:24 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
>
> > Are you then proposing three separate tarball releases?
> > Would you then split NM into three separate CVS modules?
> > Where would each of those modules live? (I can't imagine
>
On 10/3/06, Rob Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why bother when both the GNOME and KDE projects already have excellent
> window managers? I don't understand this idea of writing a whole new
> window manager just to add eye candy. There's nothing about compositing
> that requires a complete rew
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 14:44 -0400, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
> > Right now both the applet and daemon live in GNOME CVS and are released
> > together.
>
> (I don't think it's important for them to be split, unless you forsee the
> combination having an impact on adherence to the GNOME release schedu
> Right now both the applet and daemon live in GNOME CVS and are released
> together.
(I don't think it's important for them to be split, unless you forsee the
combination having an impact on adherence to the GNOME release schedule.)
I think the crucial thing we need to do when considering new
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 14:34 -0700, Rob Adams wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 17:25 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> > It would be nice if you could back up these claims with examples of
> > such missing details. Or even better, file bugs so we can get them
> > fixed. There is a component for comp
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 17:25 -0400, Kristian Høgsberg wrote:
> It would be nice if you could back up these claims with examples of
> such missing details. Or even better, file bugs so we can get them
> fixed. There is a component for compiz in the freedesktop.org
> bugzilla:
>
> https://bugs.free
On 10/3/06, Rob Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 21:18 +0100, Toby Smithe wrote:
>
> > I had a feeling this would be the case, and I doubted inclusion as soon
> > as I sent off the e-mail. I don't want a Compiz clone, so I probably
> > think that doing something new is the b
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 21:18 +0100, Toby Smithe wrote:
> I had a feeling this would be the case, and I doubted inclusion as soon
> as I sent off the e-mail. I don't want a Compiz clone, so I probably
> think that doing something new is the better approach. It's just that
> there is a working infras
On Mon, 2006-10-02 at 23:00 -0400, Dan Winship wrote:
> Toby Smithe wrote:
> > On Sun, 2006-10-01 at 01:33 +0200, Marco Cabizza wrote:
> >>So, can the metacity compositor link against something else - i.e. a
> >> compiz backend? - or is it just stalled ?
> >
> > Well, I know nothing of how it
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 11:24 -0500, Shaun McCance wrote:
> Are you then proposing three separate tarball releases?
> Would you then split NM into three separate CVS modules?
> Where would each of those modules live? (I can't imagine
> KDE being excited about KNetworkManager being hosted on
> Gnome
On Tue, 2006-10-03 at 11:40 -0400, Robert Love wrote:
> Let's try this again.
>
> I'd like to start the discussion on getting NetworkManager--more
> explicitly, its GNOME-based applet, nm-applet--into GNOME 2.18.
>
>
> Tell me about NetworkManager without using big words.
>
> NetworkManager is
Let's try this again.
I'd like to start the discussion on getting NetworkManager--more
explicitly, its GNOME-based applet, nm-applet--into GNOME 2.18.
Tell me about NetworkManager without using big words.
NetworkManager is the future of Linux networking. Red Hat, SUSE, and
others have adopted
Naba Kumar wrote:
> Hi guys, [starting a new thread]
[...]
> The website is kind of outdated, but I believe we can revive it and make
> some real effort this time. A mailing list was also setup for the group
> called gnome-devtools(@)gnome.org. I guess it is still used by some
> people (e.g. devhel
34 matches
Mail list logo
