Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop

foser <foser@×××××××××××××××××.net> said:

> On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 14:52, dams@×××.fr wrote:
>
>> Maybe add a vanilla flags, that can be unset. When unset, the DE are
>> preconfigured and gentoo touched.
>> The pb is that you want vanilla, but you want also some core feature like
>> centralized menu system, which is not compatible. So either we decide not to
>> include such features, or to have a flag.
>
> I'm quite against this, there should be one Gentoo to rule them all. I'm
> not against adding some extra patches, as long as they add clear
> functionality we can maintain (this is most important). No need for
> flags for vanilla and not so vanilla.
>
> The menu system is a difficult one i know, but in reality there are few
> people who use more than one DE. We cater the masses well at the moment,
> those who want to work with a different look 'n feel every day should be
> able to handle the downsides.
>
> The proposed implementation i have seen i dislike for several reasons,
> but mostly because of the reasons i stated down here in my last mail
> (compliance part). I think other possible solutions may be a lot more
> workable and should be investigated first. But these are details, this
> isn't the place to discuss this.

ok, but, I doubt we'll find a lot to do without braking vanilla-ness

>
>> >> - write guidelines to be more (free)desktop compliant, to be used by the whole
>> >> gentoo devs for their packages.
>> >
>> > We shouldn't be compliant, we should push upstream developers to be or
>> > work on their packages being compliant. Us providing some hackish layer
>> > of compliance is a recipe for disaster. It is fighting symptoms, while
>> > you should be attacking the problem by its root. I don't see our already
>> > heavily pressured teams do all sorts of compliance work.
>> >
>> > And no, just hiring a few more people is no solution if you want to have
>> > the same quality/involvement.
>>
>> That's a possibility, but that means that, as a linux distribution, we don't
>> provide additional compliance. If you keep the desktop vanilla, we don't either
>> provide additional desktop default. That can be what we want. But what will
>> provide gentoo linux, as desktop, then?
>
> We provide the power to work with the desktop as intended upstream. The
> GNOME Desktop is an idea as a whole, we provide it as it is. And for say
> corporate users you could say they could easily adapt their installs to
> their needs, without the necessity to hack out all sorts of distro
> specific stuff. Or for granny's email machine (installed by her
> son-in-law) she just get what she needs and not all sorts of extra cruft
> (no granny doesn't need no CD burn tools or LDAP support in her mailer).

ok, but maybe she wants that when she installs something, it shows
automaticcally in the menu, but she doesn't want to have a cluttered menu

>
>> I think a perfect corporate desktop would :
>>
>> - be cheap
>> - be installable by not so good technical guys quickly
>> - be useable at soon as it is installed
>
> 'emerge gnome' and maybe in the future (but we lack time as it is)
> 'emerge gnome-office' and off you go. I suppose KDE could create similar
> meta ebuilds.

ok, we can do this with gnome-office and so on, but it's a lot of
overloading...

I'd say, after all these opinions, the conclusion would be that gentoo is not
desktop oriented, but the desktop project handle the dekstop software, and make
sure they work great together, that's all.

>
>>
>> Now if the guy has to configure each workstation, it's not very convenient...
>
> Humm, that wouldn't be a bright guy.

hmm, I have to say : they are not bright most of the cases :) When you have to
handle customers, the reality may affraid

> It would be better to work from one
> 'image' machine in a workstation situation. I don't really see how you
> mean configuration beyond that. User configuration is ok by default
> mostly (at least for GNOME) and it is up to them to alter it to their
> preference.
>
> - foser
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

-- 
dams

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list