On Wed, May 22, 2013, at 08:09 PM, Eric Hedekar wrote: > This really was one of the most dramatic train/thread derailments I've > seen > in a while. Impressive. > > As far as other desktop environments are concerned, part of me is in > favour > of this mindset being adopted (as I've never left gnome despite Ubuntu
Same here. But I did find going with XFCE as the default desktop was the best choice at that time nevertheless, because of the uncertainty around other DEs. Also, the custom menu is not a bad addition, even if I'd rather try push new categorizations upstream, and do as little customization at the Ubuntu Studio end, as possible. > Studio's switch to xfce - I just don't like that DE). If a modular front > end was adopted then it would encourage wider usage and a better overall > design. However, what Hartmut may have been trying to state was that > this > is development is probably not the best use of developer's time. There > have almost always been stability issues, bugs, and lack of documentation > in Ubuntu Studio that the user sees as more drastic to their workflow > than Yes. But, the way I see it, the people who want to fix those things are already working on that. And it would not help the situation anyway by not allowing people who can't help fix those issues to not be allowed to do what they want to do. So, there's really no conflict there. Is anyone against the idea of multiple DE support for Ubuntu Studio? If yes, then please explain why? Otherwise, I think it's just good that we have work going on in as many fields as possible. Right now, we are mainly experimenting with adding new DEs to the mix. Something I'm sure a lot of users will appreciate. Also, while doing that, we get insight in problems we weren't aware of before. I don't see any conflict in planning here. I'd rather see more people helping out, but I suppose that will always be the situation for any volunteer project :). > annoying quirks from the given DE. So yeah, apply force to the major > problems, but it would be a prudent philosophy to reduce the amount of > xfce-specific code that ships with the distro. We don't know how long > into > the future the xfce platform will best suit our needs (very little > warning > was given during the gnome/unity move that prompted our switch to xfce in > the first place), and the lack of DE-specific code the easier it will be > for those of us who love a different DE to just switch. We don't actually have that much custom work on the DE right now, as it is mostly based on Xubuntu (len is working on that mostly). The menu is probably the biggest part of that, and it would be nice to have a generic solution to that which would work on all DEs, and the problems in that are becoming clear now that we are trying out different DEs. So, the effort in changing DE, or adding more of them is not that big. The more people learn how you develop them, the easier it becomes on the whole team as well. Right now, we have 4 different people working on the different aspects of these DEs, not counting our art lead, who will also be involved in making them look nice. Out of those four, only one is even patching Ubuntu code. So, there you have it. Most of the problems in jack and PA integration are in coding, so that is actually mostly up to the coders to fix, and currently, no one in the Ubuntu Studio team is working on developing either pulseaudio or jack. But, of course, we have a special position in that we can communicate to the coders and help make clear different issues. We can establish a good overview of the problems, etc. Doesn't require any coding skills. Just requires for someone to put some time into it, and it could be anyone. A good first step is always a bug report, as mentioned. Then, someone has to put time on finding ways to solve the problem. > > -Eric Hedekar > > * > Eric Hedekar > *http://www.erichedekar.com > -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
