I cannot believe I am reading this on GNOME central mail list!
[ snip ]
I cannot believe this topic keeps coming up again and again :-(
Linux is not about choice:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html
Guys, I can't believe I'm readeing this again. If
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 01:23:39AM -0800, Baybal Ni wrote:
Now, tell me what you and Mr. Olav are trying to infer with this discussion?
Suggest to read the thread. I'm totally not getting why you're involving
me and some other person days after the thread is over.
Note to all: I'm closing the
Hi,
Sandy Armstrong wrote:
Somehow I suspect that non-developer users on desktop-devel-list do
not represent a majority of GNOME users.
The problem is that non-developers on desktop-devel-list are only
contributing words. Their preferences and desires would carry much more
weight if
On 01/04/11 04:54, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
And: if critics are only allowed when providing patches, something isn't
right.
Your criticism is welcome. But don't expect people to follow your
recommendation. That would be demanding, not criticizing. That's the part
you are
in more focused threads
than My thoughts on fallback mode?
Brian
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
On 01/03/11 19:14, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
Still being able to type
weird characters
I count three ways of doing that:
• Ctrl + Shift + U + hexadecimal.
• Compose key.
• Character Map
Ideally we want a context menu facility to enter new characters (by opening /
embedding charmap) or
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Christopher Roy Bratusek
zang...@freenet.de wrote:
No it's not. Other WMs provide extra functionality besides bling-bling. Compiz
does tabbed-windowing, will Mutter do? Sawfish provides EdgeActions and
Viewports, will Mutter do? Other WMs provide Tiling, will
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Christopher Roy Bratusek
zang...@freenet.de wrote:
On Tuesday 04 January 2011 04:56:32 you wrote:
On 01/03/11 19:33, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
... above you said GNOME is about freedom, so now you differ between
*this* and *that* freedom, that's not a
On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 11:52:28PM -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Christopher Roy Bratusek zang...@freenet.de
wrote:
So to summarize: As long as users accept what you want them to, it's ok,
else
they might go jump in the lake... Not that other Desktops
Hi Christopher!
Besides... did modularity ever enslave a GNOME developer? Never. I expected
more than a statement like that.
This modularity prevents to create a solid user experience in various
ways because everything needs to be compatible with random components
that cannot even be tested
Hi Christopher!
This modularity prevents to create a solid user experience in various
ways because everything needs to be compatible with random components
that cannot even be tested properly.
:facepalm:
Sorry...cannot follow you here.
Well, 99%? Strange, the outermost people I know
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 10:54 +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek a
écrit :
Ever thought, that the attitude of the people above (especially Emanuelles
arrogant we allow you to choose another DE, that's the freedom we leave to
you) might stop possible contributors from doing so?
And: if
Christopher Roy Bratusek zang...@freenet.de a écrit:
especially Emanuelles
It would be a good start to spell Emmanuele's name correctly.
Just my 0.1 cent.
--
Dodji
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 10:54:59AM +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
Ever thought, that the attitude of the people above (especially Emanuelles
arrogant we allow you to choose another DE, that's the freedom we leave to
you) might stop possible contributors from doing so?
He's a
What about the freedom to choose? At the point where you disallow users to
You can choose. The FSF freedoms are sufficient for that
You can choose to run the old code
You can choose to modify the old code
You can choose to share modifications to the old code
It's completely within your power
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 10:54:29AM +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
:facepalm:
[..]
Well, 99%? Strange, the outermost people I know used something different
(AWN,
Compiz, Sawfish, OpenBox (yes, you read right), CairoDock, PCManFM, Thunar,
GNOME-Global-Menu, GnoMenu, Screenlets and
This modularity prevents to create a solid user experience in various ways
because everything needs to be compatible with random components that cannot
even be tested properly.
I cannot believe I am reading this on GNOME central mail list! Is this the
same GNOME that helped to improve WM
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Sergey Udaltsov
sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote:
This modularity prevents to create a solid user experience in various ways
because everything needs to be compatible with random components that cannot
even be tested properly.
I cannot believe I am reading this
These standards are there to make sure GNOME *apps* are first-class
citizens in other DEs ( vice versa). It has little to do with being
able to play mix-and-match with core desktop components.
From X11 POV gnome-shell is just an app. Why should it depend so heavily on
features of some
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 11:11 +, Sergey Udaltsov a écrit :
From X11 POV gnome-shell is just an app. Why should it depend so
heavily on features of some particular wm?
Maybe because it's using Clutter, and no WM other than Mutter allows
displaying windows as Clutter actors? The Shell isn't
Hi!
From X11 POV gnome-shell is just an app. Why should it depend so
heavily on features of some particular wm? Perhaps, those features
could be published, standardized so other wms could follow? Just like
netwm...
No, it's a window manager plugin (more specific a mutter plugin) so for
the
Maybe because it's using Clutter, and no WM other than Mutter allows
displaying windows as Clutter actors? The Shell isn't external to the
WM, it lives in the WM, and thus depends on its peculiarities.
Could that be standardized?
___
On 4 January 2011 10:59, Sergey Udaltsov sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote:
This modularity prevents to create a solid user experience in various ways
because everything needs to be compatible with random components that cannot
even be tested properly.
I cannot believe I am reading this on
I cannot believe this topic keeps coming up again and again :-(
Linux is not about choice:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html
You know why this happen again and again? Because ppl want it to be about
choice.
Sergey AKA Capt. Obvious
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 11:20 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
Maybe because it's using Clutter, and no WM other than Mutter allows
displaying windows as Clutter actors? The Shell isn't external to
the
WM, it lives in the WM, and thus depends on its peculiarities.
Could that be standardized?
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 10:36 +0100, Johannes Schmid wrote:
Hi Christopher!
Besides... did modularity ever enslave a GNOME developer? Never. I expected
more than a statement like that.
This modularity prevents to create a solid user experience in various
ways because everything needs to
I don't see gnome-applets as part of GNOME 3. But it doesn't mean we
cannot ship gnome-applets 3.x.
GNOME 3 is about gnome-shell. Gnome-applets will always be a fallback. A
fallback which includes gnome-applets would be nice. But it is a
still fallback.
So the statement: gnome 3 is not
Hi!
Either way still one question remain:
Assume this:
- Power-User
- using Compiz/Sawfish/Whatever
- wants to use Compiz/Sawfish/Whatever with GNOME-Shell as he likes both
I think that's the wrong question. The right question would be:
Power-User wants to have feature X,Y and Z. I hope
Hi,
Andre Klapper wrote:
Am Montag, den 03.01.2011, 21:00 + schrieb Sergey Udaltsov:
Thanks again, I really hope the release team would consider your
opinion seriously.
to clarify: What exactly do you expect from the release team?
For my part, I'd like what I said: a commitment that if
Assume this:
- Power-User
- using Compiz/Sawfish/Whatever
- wants to use Compiz/Sawfish/Whatever with GNOME-Shell as he likes both
What now? You said that you would like them to stay at GNOMEs, but how do you
want to achieve that? (that's a serious question!).
By making GNOME 3 the best
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 14:07 +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
What I don't understand is why the decision was made that it is being
implemented as a Mutter (strange name for a WM if you speak german, btw)
plugin, rather than as a normal application which would allow to be used
with any
On Di, 04.01.2011 12:13, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
I'm also a maintainer
As it puts your posts into context, you could have mentioned that
you're actually the maintainer of Sawfish. In all of your posts in this
thread, I don't hear a concerned user, but an annoyed WM developer,
angry that
Well, in this case I am a user. Believe me, it's not me who wants to use SF
with GNOME Shell. (if you want a prove I can give some)
No, I know lots of users feeling like that, the outermost are compiz users, but
also openbox co. To be exact I know only 3 people using SF with GNOME - I'm
none
This probably should have been done a while ago, but here is a
separate thread for discussing this.
Well, in this case I am a user. Believe me, it's not me who wants to use SF
with GNOME Shell. (if you want a prove I can give some)
No, I know lots of users feeling like that, the outermost
other window managers with gnome-shell doesn't even make sense
technically. the WM is entangled with the shell, which is the whole
point, because it lets you do more complex things and have smooth
graphics.
what you could have instead could be:
* have a well-defined interface to replace the
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Havoc Pennington h...@pobox.com wrote:
other window managers with gnome-shell doesn't even make sense
technically. the WM is entangled with the shell, which is the whole
point, because it lets you do more complex things and have smooth
graphics.
I know that.
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 10:54 +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek a
écrit :
Ever thought, that the attitude of the people above (especially Emanuelles
arrogant we allow you to choose another DE, that's the freedom we leave to
you) might stop possible contributors from doing so?
And: if
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 16:27 +0100, Holger Berndt a écrit :
As it puts your posts into context, you could have mentioned that
you're actually the maintainer of Sawfish. In all of your posts in
this
thread, I don't hear a concerned user, but an annoyed WM developer,
angry that the GNOME
Hi Gendre,
On Di, 04.01.2011 18:47, Gendre Sebastien wrote:
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 16:27 +0100, Holger Berndt a écrit :
As it puts your posts into context, you could have mentioned that
you're actually the maintainer of Sawfish. In all of your posts in
this
thread, I don't hear a
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 18:37 +0100, Gendre Sebastien wrote:
- Gnome Shell are no modular. It's need to separate the Shell from the
window manager. Each window have to be managed by the window manager
and
Shell menu and panels by the Shell. With actually Gnome Shell, the
non-modularity imposes
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 12:00, Holger Berndt h...@gnome.org wrote:
On Di, 04.01.2011 18:47, Gendre Sebastien wrote:
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 16:27 +0100, Holger Berndt a écrit :
As it puts your posts into context, you could have mentioned that
you're actually the maintainer of Sawfish. In
It would be like releasing a new car and then telling the buyer that the
tires that are included aren't good enough but that's okay because they are
free to go through the trouble of replacing them right after they take
ownership. Modularity is not a feature; a good feature is a feature.
You
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote:
It would be like releasing a new car and then telling the buyer that the
tires that are included aren't good enough but that's okay because they are
free to go through the trouble of replacing them right after they take
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 12:25, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote:
It would be like releasing a new car and then telling the buyer that the
tires that are included aren't good enough but that's okay because they
are
free to go through the trouble of replacing them right after they take
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 06:37:33PM +0100, Gendre Sebastien wrote:
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 10:54 +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek a
écrit :
[..]
GNOME3 + Compiz = Fail ... or: GNOME3 + Sawfish = Fail
[..]
I agree with you Chris. The non-modularity of GnomeShell and the
non-mind-open of her
Emmanuele Bassi schreef op di 04-01-2011 om 00:14 [+]:
Still being able to type
weird characters
I count three ways of doing that:
• Ctrl + Shift + U + hexadecimal.
• Compose key.
• Character Map
Let me add convenient for frequent use to my original phrasing and my
point still
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 20:37 +0100, Wouter Bolsterlee wrote:
Emmanuele Bassi schreef op di 04-01-2011 om 00:14 [+]:
Still being able to type
weird characters
I count three ways of doing that:
• Ctrl + Shift + U + hexadecimal.
• Compose key.
• Character Map
Let me add
Christopher Roy Bratusek schreef op di 04-01-2011 om 11:04 [+0100]:
Well the resources? No, I don't think so. The decision to disallow
other WMs was made in very early stages of GNOME-Shell, where enough
resources were available to write it in a way so that it can work with
any WM.
Gnome
Maciej Piechotka schreef op di 04-01-2011 om 20:43 [+0100]:
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 20:37 +0100, Wouter Bolsterlee wrote:
Let me add convenient for frequent use to my original phrasing and my
point still holds.
I believe that compose key gives such option.
Say Compose+g+a can be configured to
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Christopher Roy Bratusek
zang...@freenet.de wrote:
Just one last thing for now: Most of those who disagreed with me are
developers, most of them who agreed with me are users.
Somehow I suspect that non-developer users on desktop-devel-list do
not represent a
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 06:37:33PM +0100, Gendre Sebastien wrote:
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 10:54 +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek a
écrit :
[..]
GNOME3 + Compiz = Fail ... or: GNOME3 + Sawfish = Fail
[..]
I agree
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 13:58, Christopher Roy Bratusek
zang...@freenet.dewrote:
I'm not personally attacking people with whom I disagree. I just
described where the different perception of how many users want to
replace their WM might come from. Which is quite a central point when
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 08:58:26PM +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
The solution would have been to provide a fallback mode for GNOME-Shell,
which
allows it to run with any WM. AFAIR it was rejected because of architectual
reason, which if you ask me don't make sense, as the stack
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 21:07 +0100, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
Compared to how many users stuff like Compiz, AWN Co got I would say it's
somewhere between 5 and 10%.
Please take AWN (CairoDock, Docky, ...) out of your argumentation -
there's exactly nothing stopping you from using those
On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 09:21:01PM +0100, Florian Müllner wrote:
Please take AWN (CairoDock, Docky, ...) out of your argumentation -
there's exactly nothing stopping you from using those applications with
GNOME Shell.
Let's agree that we cannot be certain and stop this guessing at
this
Somehow I suspect that non-developer users on desktop-devel-list do
not represent a majority of GNOME users.
Well, the world is bigger than this ML and I never said that the majority is
complaining, just that 1% is not the truth.
Compared to how many users stuff like Compiz, AWN Co got I
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 20:58 +0100, Wouter Bolsterlee wrote:
Maciej Piechotka schreef op di 04-01-2011 om 20:43 [+0100]:
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 20:37 +0100, Wouter Bolsterlee wrote:
Let me add convenient for frequent use to my original phrasing and my
point still holds.
I believe that
Am Dienstag, den 04.01.2011, 20:58 +0100 schrieb Christopher Roy
Bratusek:
But as some have unvealed today, it's not the real reason, marketing is the
magic word and to provide a desktop made from one, and some other less
valid
reasons (eg.: even if you allow modularization you can provide
2011/1/4 Mario Blättermann mari...@gnome.org
Am Dienstag, den 04.01.2011, 20:58 +0100 schrieb Christopher Roy
Bratusek:
Have a look at the most important GNOME-reseller Ubuntu: There will be
no gnome-shell by default, they have decided to use Unity. Well, due to
it is also clutter-based,
Well, now that people are throwing percents at each other, it is a
very interesting point as such - does anybody know anything about
userbase whose experience GNOME3 is going to improve? I am not
ranting/trolling here, I am really interested. Was there any research
made?
There is an
Le mardi 04 janvier 2011 à 11:29 +, Sergey Udaltsov a écrit :
I cannot believe this topic keeps coming up again and again :-(
Linux is not about choice:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-January/msg00861.html
You know why this happen again and again? Because ppl
Pretty hard to jump in on the mega-thread at this point. But wanted to
provide a few notes from my perspective:
* I like the term fallback mode better than classic GNOME or
GNOME 2 because it doesn't set up the expectation that everything
is identical. And there are significant changes -
Hi,
Thanks for your perspective. What you say makes sense, and matches up
well with what I think.
Owen Taylor wrote:
* If (*if*) it doesn't suck up a lot of developer time, I don't see any
harm in continuing to provide gnome-applets. Yes, I suppose it could
be considered weird if
Hi Owen
Thanks a lot for expressing reasonable and really sane point of view!
* There will also be some people that want to use gnome-panel because
they aren't ready to change. While we want to encourage people who
have capable hardware to update and use the new experience, there
are
Hi Sergey,
Am Montag, den 03.01.2011, 21:00 + schrieb Sergey Udaltsov:
Thanks again, I really hope the release team would consider your
opinion seriously.
to clarify: What exactly do you expect from the release team?
andre
--
mailto:ak...@gmx.net | failed
http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper
Am Montag, den 03.01.2011, 13:37 -0500 schrieb Owen Taylor:
There will also be some people that want to use gnome-panel because
they aren't ready to change. While we want to encourage people who
have capable hardware to update and use the new experience, there
are multiple advantages
2011/1/3 Mario Blättermann mari...@gnome.org
Am Montag, den 03.01.2011, 13:37 -0500 schrieb Owen Taylor:
There will also be some people that want to use gnome-panel because
they aren't ready to change. While we want to encourage people who
have capable hardware to update and use the
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 23:10 +0100, Mario Blättermann wrote:
On my five
years old IBM Thinkpad T41 with ATI Radeon Mobility 7500 I cannot use
gnome-shell. Only black windows... On the other hand, Compiz with most
of its nice features works fine.
this is a bug.
Mutter does not require
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 15:09 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
2011/1/3 Mario Blättermann mari...@gnome.org
Am Montag, den 03.01.2011, 13:37 -0500 schrieb Owen Taylor:
There will also be some people that want to use gnome-panel
because
they aren't ready
to clarify: What exactly do you expect from the release team?
Some more positive attitude to gnome-applets, first of all. Looking at
the gnome-applets thread I got impression that RT was not going to
accept gnome-applets under any circumstances. The message I got was
anyone is free to maintain
Sergey Udaltsov schreef op ma 03-01-2011 om 23:38 [+]:
to clarify: What exactly do you expect from the release team?
Some more positive attitude to gnome-applets, first of all.
For what it's worth: to me Gnome Applets is more than a random
collection of pretty useless applets. These
Am Dienstag, den 04.01.2011, 00:41 +0100 schrieb Christopher Roy
Bratusek:
What about to have a gnome-shell with a fallback
mode which works (with function constraints) with the good old metacity
or other window managers?
*that* would be a kick-ass to step back from We force you to use
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 00:50 +0100, Wouter Bolsterlee wrote:
Sergey Udaltsov schreef op ma 03-01-2011 om 23:38 [+]:
to clarify: What exactly do you expect from the release team?
Some more positive attitude to gnome-applets, first of all.
For what it's worth: to me Gnome Applets is
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 01:10 +0100, Mario Blättermann wrote:
Am Dienstag, den 04.01.2011, 00:41 +0100 schrieb Christopher Roy
Bratusek:
What about to have a gnome-shell with a fallback
mode which works (with function constraints) with the good old metacity
or other window managers?
Hi Wouter,
Sergey Udaltsov schreef op ma 03-01-2011 om 23:38 [+]:
to clarify: What exactly do you expect from the release team?
Some more positive attitude to gnome-applets, first of all.
For what it's
Peter Korn schreef op ma 03-01-2011 om 16:18 [-0800]:
I'm unsure about these ones:
- AccessX Status
Folks who are deaf and also have a physical impairment that impacts
their ability to type (e.g. only a single functioning finger
equivalent) need a visual indication of the AccessX status.
On Mon, 2011-01-03 at 16:18 -0800, Peter Korn wrote:
Hi Wouter,
Sergey Udaltsov schreef op ma 03-01-2011 om 23:38 [+]:
to clarify: What exactly do you expect from the release team?
Some more positive attitude to gnome-applets, first of all.
For what it's worth: to me Gnome
Wouter,
...
Thanks for clarifying. My message was about the Gnome panel/applets
situation, so I think the AccessX Status applet should be moved to the
list of important features if is the de facto way for Gnome panel and no
alternative is available.
On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 11:38:14PM +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
to clarify: What exactly do you expect from the release team?
Some more positive attitude to gnome-applets, first of all. Looking at
the gnome-applets thread I got impression that RT was not going to
accept gnome-applets under
Hi Shaun,
...
Folks who are deaf and also have a physical impairment that impacts
their ability to type (e.g. only a single functioning "finger
equivalent") need a visual indication of the AccessX status. This
doesn't have to be
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 00:14 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
I count three ways of doing that:
• Ctrl + Shift + U + hexadecimal.
• Compose key.
They are obscure.
• Character Map
Launching an app to enter a single character?
This doesn't seem serious.
--
murr...@murrayc.com
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Murray Cumming murr...@murrayc.com wrote:
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 00:14 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
I count three ways of doing that:
• Ctrl + Shift + U + hexadecimal.
• Compose key.
They are obscure.
• Character Map
Launching an app to enter a
On 01/03/11 19:33, Christopher Roy Bratusek wrote:
... above you said GNOME is about freedom, so now you differ between *this*
and
*that* freedom, that's not a very straight-line king to argue, if you ask me.
You're talking about your denied freedom for you as a user to enslave the
GNOME
On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Christopher Roy Bratusek zang...@freenet.de
wrote:
So to summarize: As long as users accept what you want them to, it's ok,
else
they might go jump in the lake... Not that other Desktops fullfil users
wishes
by 100% but much more than GNOME3 will do.
I
84 matches
Mail list logo
