ubuntu-tweak has a very big user base from country to country. The functions it provides are pretty good, and the software is actively well maintained. If there is a right choice for providing more user friendly system 'tweak' tool, then ubuntu-tweak should be the one.
Ubuntu (more exactly, GNOME, perhaps) is still lacking many configuration tools to help users to let the software work as they expected, and ubuntu-tweak provides a set of such UIs to make it come true. It doesn't 'tweak' the system on its own, but let users to choose what it behaves, for example there is an option to show "Computer" link on the desktop, which could only switched on using gconf-editor if we prefer using a graphic tool. The software is well tested before every release, the author releases a beta version before any official one, and some beta testers (they are almost fan of ubuntu-tweak) will test it out and give feedback. When they believe there isn't any important or milestone bugs they will release an official one. On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 09:09, Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 09:05:25 pm LI Daobing wrote: >> Hello, >> >> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 09:00, Scott Kitterman <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Tuesday, August 03, 2010 01:29:46 pm Jonathan Riddell wrote: >> >> Ubuntu Tweak is waiting for approval in New queue. >> >> http://ubuntu-tweak.com/ >> >> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/252140 >> >> >> >> Is this something MOTU wants included? >> > >> > No. >> > >> > It looks to me like something that, in addition to proper packaging, >> > ought to have a thorough functional review before entering the archive. >> >> I am the packager of ubuntu-tweak, can you tell me what's the problem >> with ubuntu-tweak? >> > > I don't know that there is a problem, but given the invasive nature of it's > functionality, I think it appropriate for it to be given more of a review than > just being packaged properly. In Ubuntu's history there have been multiple > "Tweak" programs and so far they have always proved to be more harmful than > helpful at the scale the Ubuntu archive operates. > > This one may be the one that gets it right, but having found that they rebrand > PPAs that other people maintain as there's on their web site, I'm not at all > inclined to assume this is all well intentioned. > > Scott K > > -- > Ubuntu-motu mailing list > [email protected] > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: > https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu > -- Regards, Aron Xu -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
