Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-23 Thread calmstorm
This is what we need... LXQT sounds like what we need.

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-22 Thread dguthrie
Gtk2 is outdated. Gtk3 is the feature and it is great they support it soon. Xfce always did drain power more than Lxde and various window managers. To be honest Gtk is not going to make much difference compared to screen brightness, WiFi etc.

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-22 Thread calmstorm
I really hope they don't go to GTK3 though, as it drains battery power more than GTK2 according to what I have heard about it.

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-21 Thread dahunt
As I write this, I am using Uruk 32-bit edition on my laptop, having a Core 2 Duo processor and 3 gb ram; The running Mate desktop is very fast, and applications seem to load more quickly than they would, even in the stock Triisquel 7. I had trouble getting orca to run on my two older

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-21 Thread dguthrie
MATE is better I think. It runs on old computers reasonably well and is as easy, if not easier than GNOME Shell. And more recent versions of MATE have GTK3 Support, and in future they plan to support Wayland. This is a good option I think.

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-21 Thread dahunt
For the live image, go with GNOME Shell; it works and is accessible; I just don't like all that overhead. If you can get speech and braille into the net install, as Debian has done, and offer all the desktops, with whatever accessibility they support, I think everyone's covered.

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-21 Thread greatgnu
> What do you want to contain in it How do you want it to be Based on the next Debian stable with the Pantheon DE by default. Can you do that for me? :D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lB4QDWVIMM

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-21 Thread blade . vp2020
XFCE will be the default but we Thinking to make Custom iso for users nede accessible (for me I cant use XFCE) but I confused what to use

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-21 Thread blade . vp2020
yes we Thinking about using it as default but The big problem is for me I prefer GNOME Shell its so accessible What is the best for you Mate or GNOME Shell?

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-21 Thread dahunt
I haven't tried xfce lately, but last time I did, the panel and file manager weren't accessible, though all the apps I tried seemed to be so. Xfce's nice and fast, however, and may be the best option, for the default de, if you're planning to accommodate light-weight systems.

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-21 Thread blade . vp2020
> Maybe an accessible login greeter, such as the one used in Trisquel? ok > How about an accessible net installer, such as in Debian? we will try > I'd suggest sticking to Mate > 1.12, based on problem reports that latelyh come up on Sonar GNU support forum. its not best to use Mate We will

Re: [Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-20 Thread dahunt
Maybe an accessible login greeter, such as the one used in Trisquel? How about an accessible net installer, such as in Debian? I'd suggest sticking to Mate 1.12, based on problem reports that latelyh come up on Sonar GNU support forum. if you are sticking with Mate, how about including

[Trisquel-users] suggestions to uruk gnu/linux 2.0

2016-08-20 Thread blade . vp2020
hi we will start to develop uruk gnu/linux 2.0 What do you want to contain in it How do you want it to be All suggestions Ar welcome and we will try to implement all suggestions have fun and be free ali miracle