Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Spider <spider@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 17:44:09
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop by Paul de Vrieze
1 begin quote
2 On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 16:00:13 +0200
3 Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote:
5 > Gnome's configuration does not include a menu system with all
6 > installed X applications
7 >
9 No, and this is in many cases a -good- thing. Gnome does not -need- to
10 provide menu entries for xcalc, xmag, xeyes and a lot of other X
11 applications. To include theese on a default menu would go against
12 guidelines and common sense.
14 This means that for many such applications a good line of reasoning has
15 to be added so our default "newbie-friendly" desktop doesn't end looking
16 like L random User 's desktop did in the year 1997 after 1.5 years of
17 active installation in windows 95. ie, it would be a clear sodomization
18 of a good interface.
22 However, there are some points coming up otherways in the thread that we
23 have to bring up front.
25 1) No major redesigns of the DE's.
26 This is important, we shan't make all icons look like different versions
27 of larry, replace all Foot's , K's and other such things with a G', make
28 the default to include Gentoo Tip of the Day, add links on
29 every desktop, make all desktops install Evolution and add it as the
30 default mailhandler everywhere "because its the best" .
32 2) We need a consensus and smooth integration of tools. This is the more
33 important part of a Gentoo desktop. A cdburner shall work for users in
34 the 'cdrw' group, and preferrably without running a Druid or Wizard.
36 3) Multimedia.
37 The various DE's partially integrate their own multimedia
38 applications, but theese all use common backend libraries.
40 We need somone/s to dump all quicktime library related bugs, and that
41 takes care of libmad and other background things (lame, flac, libid3 and
42 so on) wherea's the various DE's make sure the end user tools work as
43 desired.
45 This is a thankless task that has to be done.
46 (fex, gstreamer + related is part of the gnome herd, whereas ffmpeg,
47 xine-lib, lame, libogg, libvorbis, libmad and a lot of other background
48 things that need to work has to be taken care of. )
50 4) Menu's
51 There's a lot of controversy here. I want the installation of such a
52 system to be a consious act and preferrably kept off per default.
53 (genmenu is a good example here. very good even.)
55 5) extra-DE integration.
56 This mainly belongs upstream, as DE's move towards common standards
57 this is something we can lean back and reap the fruits of.
60 6) intra-DE modifications
61 I'm all for the various DE's implementing or removing features, as
62 long as its maintainable, and sane. Adding highstrung pipedreams that
63 can't be made to work properly is not our thing. Leave this to
64 Mandrake, SuSE and RedHat. They are good at it.
67 7) "Vanilla flag"
68 This shouldn't be necessary. Anything thats intrusive enough to
69 require something like that needs to be thought over -veeery- carefully
70 and is a bug per design.
72 adding an option to remove a broken feature is -wrong- and the
73 implementor of said patch and flag should be made to read "A discipline
74 for Software Engineering" by Watts S. Humphrey. And follow the rules
75 described therein.
77 8) Extra
78 What needs to be made work though, is a consistent set of graphics to be
79 made avaiable, and perhaps default. Fex, the GRUB loader should have a
80 graphics design similar to the framebuffer background, as well as the
81 GDM and KDM + elogin themes.
83 This sort of branding is not intrusive on the user (framebuffer
84 background is the most intrusive one, and should and could well be
85 disabled by default)
88 9) Decisions and communications
89 All theese things need to be properly discussed and in the open. I was
90 shocked to find out I suddenly got a manager who thought I was to run my
91 decisions about including applications to the Gnome desktop by them, as
92 well as the idea of a single uniformed Gentoo desktop is completely
93 -appalling- to me. In this regard the ruling cabal (ie, management)
94 have flunked completely and their actions , and more
95 importantly, inactions are to be questioned. This whole process could
96 have been dealt with far nicer.
99 End rant,
100 Spider
105 --
106 begin .signature
107 This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
108 See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
109 end


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop Peter Ruskin <aoyu93@×××××××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop dams@×××.fr
Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>