On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 15:10 +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 17:00 +0530, Vishnoo a écrit :
> > Is Getting GNOME3 really worth it? GTK3 maybe for the parts which are
> > required for Unity..
>
> Yes, we need to move away from old unmaintained and deprecated
> technology f
Alex Launi [2011-04-07 23:46 -0400]:
> I can honestly say that when I am not in a unity environment, I don't feel
> at home.
I couldn't have believed it even two months ago still, but today I
feel the same. When I switch back to classic GNOME it feels inferior
now; I'm particularly missing the su
Rick Spencer [2011-04-07 18:38 -0700]:
> 1. There are key feature regressions, for example, there is no systray
> support for many important applications.
For the record, this is currently purely a design decision, not a
technical problem. Unity does have a systray, but most applications
are not a
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 17:27 -0500, Micah Gersten wrote:
>
> Please note, I was suggesting not having Firefox or Chromium as the
> default, but a webkit based browser with a normal release cycle like
> Epiphany (which uses webkitgtk :)).
If I'v understood that right, what you are suggesting is we
I can honestly say that when I am not in a unity environment, I don't feel
at home. I bounce back and forth between ubuntu and osx, and when nvidia was
broken, and when I'm in osx, I often find myself trying to 4 finger slide,
throwing my mouse to 0,0, tapping super, and generally evoking unity idi
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Rick Spencer wrote:
> 1. There are key feature regressions, for example, there is no systray
> support for many important applications.
According to the AppIndicator Design document the notification area
will be phased out:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CustomStatusMenuD
Hi all,
I think I can offer some opinions on this without repeating what
others say too much.
I want to compare this to the decision a few releases ago to make
Empathy the default IM client in Ubuntu. Then why I think Unity
should become the default desktop session and not classic GNOME.
Pidgin
Hello all,
Back at UDS for 11.04 in Orlando, Mark set the goal of using Unity by
default on the Ubutu desktop. Given the current course of development,
it appears that we are going to achieve this goal, and Unity will stay
the default for 11.04.
I'm following up on this list at the suggestion of
So, with the ongoing work to make unity more accessible, and to make the whole
accessibility experience better, one area that hasn't been given enough
attention is the installer. Given that it uses webkit for the slideshow, and
has some nice looking, but not 100% accessible layouts, users often
>> Also, some Ubuntu-specific patches, like the appindicators ones are
>> duplicated in lots of packages, so it would be good if we could find a
>> better way to make upstream apps use them, like, for instance, patching
>> gtk_status_icon_* in GTK itself to use the indicators when available,
>> ins
On 04/07/2011 05:59 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> kind of obvious topic, but next cycle we'll need to move to GTK3 and
> GNOME3. Aside from the obvious "update the package versions", I see
> the following particular challenges:
>
> * Review our patches, and be rather aggressive about rem
On 04/07/2011 09:23 PM, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> Priority: medium?
>
> While working on the GNOME3 PPA during this cycle, I found we have a lot
> of patches in many packages, which makes things harder when upgrading to
> major versions, and also introduces new ways for the apps to fail, as
> the fixes
On 04/07/2011 05:59 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> kind of obvious topic, but next cycle we'll need to move to GTK3 and
> GNOME3. Aside from the obvious "update the package versions", I see
> the following particular challenges:
>
> * Review our patches, and be rather aggressive about rem
On 04/07/2011 05:21 PM, Luke Yelavich wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 01:36:01AM EST, Micah Gersten wrote:
>> Since now both Firefox and Chromium have committed to rapid release
>> schedules, I think it's time to reevaluate the default browser in
>> Ubuntu. I am concerned that some of these upgra
On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 01:36:01AM EST, Micah Gersten wrote:
> Since now both Firefox and Chromium have committed to rapid release
> schedules, I think it's time to reevaluate the default browser in
> Ubuntu. I am concerned that some of these upgrades might break system
> integration at some point
On 04/07/2011 09:57 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Chris Coulson [2011-04-07 9:25 +0100]:
>> - This means that Firefox will output xpi's for every language in the
>> future (not just for en-US). We either need to package these in to
>> dedicated language packs for Firefox (e.g., firefox-locale-foo)
> I.
Since now both Firefox and Chromium have committed to rapid release
schedules, I think it's time to reevaluate the default browser in
Ubuntu. I am concerned that some of these upgrades might break system
integration at some point. While the security team does its best to
prevent regressions, we c
Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre [2011-04-07 8:42 -0400]:
> - NM integration with proxy configuration
+1 on that (I was actually about to bring that up myself, but you beat
me to it :) ).
GNOME 3 already solves this very nicely.
Martin
--
Martin Pitt| http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu
Chris Coulson [2011-04-07 9:25 +0100]:
> - Firstly, I think we should kill po2xpi entirely. It's basically
> doing what the Firefox build system is already very good at doing
> (building xpi's from source). We should be using the Firefox build
> system to build the language pack xpi's that we ship
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 08:30 -0400, Mathieu Trudel-Lapierre wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Rodrigo Moya
> wrote:
> [...]
> > So, for next cycle, I would suggest a "small" goal of trying to do patch
> > upstreaming/cleaning days, maybe once a week or every 2 weeks.
>
> Great idea :)
>
>
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 15:03 +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 11:22 +0200, Krzysztof Klimonda a écrit :
> > Hmm.. I'd like to propose bringing back the idea of the Stracciatella
> > session, and making it possible to get both GNOME3 and Gtk+3
> > applications to look and beh
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 09:59 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> * Discuss GTK3 theming with UX/design. Our current murrine based
>Humanity theme doesn't work with GTK3.
s/Humanity theme/Ambiance theme or Radiance theme. :-)
Humanity is an icon theme..
Or maybe you were thinking abo
Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 17:00 +0530, Vishnoo a écrit :
> Is Getting GNOME3 really worth it? GTK3 maybe for the parts which are
> required for Unity..
Yes, we need to move away from old unmaintained and deprecated
technology for their modern equivalent (gtk2 to gtk3, gconf to dconf,
dbus-glib to
Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 13:32 +0200, Rodrigo Moya a écrit :
> there was a gtk3-engines-murrine package in the GNOME3 PPA some weeks
> ago, IIRC, so maybe that's a good starting point to port our themes?
Hi,
That package was from when gtk3 was still use the old theming way, Cimi
started a new cs
Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 11:22 +0200, Krzysztof Klimonda a écrit :
> Hmm.. I'd like to propose bringing back the idea of the Stracciatella
> session, and making it possible to get both GNOME3 and Gtk+3
> applications to look and behave as close as possible to what users get
> in other distributions
Hi all,
As you may be aware, the next release will most likely bring in the
new version of NetworkManager (0.9 now) with all kinds of fun stuff,
like WiMAX and me porting the indicator patch to any changes that may
have been made to nm-applet for 0.9, unless it makes it upstream
before then ;)
Ho
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 7:23 AM, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
[...]
> So, for next cycle, I would suggest a "small" goal of trying to do patch
> upstreaming/cleaning days, maybe once a week or every 2 weeks.
Great idea :)
> Also, some Ubuntu-specific patches, like the appindicators ones are
> duplicated i
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 13:46 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> >
> they are not removed, they are moved to another place, which is
> gnome-tweak-tool, available in the GNOME3 PPA
>
Oh! Yea, I've heard of that tweak tool but never tried it.
Maybe we should consider including the tweak-tool by default on
On 07/04/11 05:22, Krzysztof Klimonda wrote:
Hmm.. I'd like to propose bringing back the idea of the Stracciatella
session, and making it possible to get both GNOME3 and Gtk+3
applications to look and behave as close as possible to what users get
in other distributions. [1] I know it's not a new
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 17:00 +0530, Vishnoo wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 10:32 +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> > Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 09:59 +0200, Martin Pitt a écrit :
> > > kind of obvious topic, but next cycle we'll need to move to GTK3 and
> > > GNOME3. Aside from the obvious "update the
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 09:59 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> kind of obvious topic, but next cycle we'll need to move to GTK3 and
> GNOME3. Aside from the obvious "update the package versions", I see
> the following particular challenges:
>
> * Review our patches, and be rather aggress
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 10:32 +0200, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 09:59 +0200, Martin Pitt a écrit :
> > kind of obvious topic, but next cycle we'll need to move to GTK3 and
> > GNOME3. Aside from the obvious "update the package versions", I see
> > the following particular chal
Priority: medium?
While working on the GNOME3 PPA during this cycle, I found we have a lot
of patches in many packages, which makes things harder when upgrading to
major versions, and also introduces new ways for the apps to fail, as
the fixes are rebased to apply to the new upstream version.
Whi
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 09:59 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
Hey
> kind of obvious topic, but next cycle we'll need to move to GTK3 and
> GNOME3. Aside from the obvious "update the package versions", I see
> the following particular challenges:
>
> * Review our patches, and be rather aggr
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:25, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 10:06 +0200, Martin Pitt a écrit :
> > I hear that next cycle we will probably be required to ship unity-2d,
> > and with it Qt. This means we'll need yet another round of "where to
> > get the space from?".
>
> Hi,
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> In the last years we fell victim to an ever-growing set of language
> runtimes and toolkits, but I realize that getting rid of each of them
> is hard. So if we want to keep adding new features without removing
> others, we might
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> I expect that in practice pretty much everyone uses usb-creator and
> USB sticks with the current ISOs anyway. The 700 MB limit still serves
> as a good boundary because with every 100 MB it grows we'll lose some
> people who are able to downloa
I've grown very fond of the appindicators and the fact that they work
equally well in both gnome-panel and Unity, is something I really
appreciate. Now, it seems the Gnome platform is moving away from the
traditional way of working with Gnome 2, and that's fine, innovation
is good. But I think a lo
Evan Broder [2011-04-07 1:11 -0700]:
> Booting Ubuntu off of an actual CD is impressively slow these days;
> using a USB drive instead would give first-time users a better
> experience.
I expect that in practice pretty much everyone uses usb-creator and
USB sticks with the current ISOs anyway. Th
On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 10:06:54AM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> So if we want to keep adding new features without removing
> others, we might also eventually reconsider moving to 1 GB USB images
> and entirely stop shipping CD images (on mirrors/shop/Loco
> distribution, etc.) This would be somethin
Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 09:59 +0200, Martin Pitt a écrit :
> kind of obvious topic, but next cycle we'll need to move to GTK3 and
> GNOME3. Aside from the obvious "update the package versions", I see
> the following particular challenges:
Hello,
(You stole my topic! ;-)
Joke aside we should do
On Thu, 2011-04-07 at 10:07 +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Priority: low
>
> Discuss integration of Firefox translations into Launchpad and
> language-packs. This decayed quite a bit since Firefox 4.0 in Natty,
> and right now we are back to just using the upstream tarballs.
>
> Martin
Hi,
Thanks
Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 10:06 +0200, Martin Pitt a écrit :
> I hear that next cycle we will probably be required to ship unity-2d,
> and with it Qt. This means we'll need yet another round of "where to
> get the space from?".
Hi,
We should probably discuss dropping "classic GNOME" (i.e the GN
On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 1:06 AM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> In the last years we fell victim to an ever-growing set of language
> runtimes and toolkits, but I realize that getting rid of each of them
> is hard. So if we want to keep adding new features without removing
> others, we might also eventually
Priority: low
Rediscuss the structure of language-support-* metapackages vs.
language-selector's dynamic detection of missing packages; right now
this is a wild mix, and I'd like to consistently use language-selector
for everything.
This is only little actual work, but needs a bit of thought firs
Priority: low
Discuss integration of Firefox translations into Launchpad and
language-packs. This decayed quite a bit since Firefox 4.0 in Natty,
and right now we are back to just using the upstream tarballs.
Martin
--
Martin Pitt| http://www.piware.de
Ubuntu Developer (w
Hello all,
I hear that next cycle we will probably be required to ship unity-2d,
and with it Qt. This means we'll need yet another round of "where to
get the space from?".
Next cycle we'll drop Python 2.6, but at the same time add Python 3,
so the python-* library packages won't shrink. In the c
Hello all,
kind of obvious topic, but next cycle we'll need to move to GTK3 and
GNOME3. Aside from the obvious "update the package versions", I see
the following particular challenges:
* Review our patches, and be rather aggressive about removing those
which are intrusive and which we have ca
48 matches
Mail list logo
