| 1 |
Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> said: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Thursday 28 August 2003 12:51, dams@×××.fr wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> The problem is that the conclusion will tend to tune/modify the DE, and it |
| 6 |
>> seems that people here don't want that, they want vanilla DE. For ex., menu |
| 7 |
>> system is the first improvment I think of, but it has a big impact on the |
| 8 |
>> look&feel of the DE. If we don't want DE tuned, then we cannot use debian |
| 9 |
>> like menu system. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> That is true, there might be some custom parts in the DE's. I those cases I |
| 12 |
> think we should have some "vanilla" useflag that turns of |
| 13 |
> customizations/hacks that are gentoo-specific and are safe to turn of |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
That's feasable, but may add some maintainance overloading |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> > That research leads sometimes to proposed changes. Each of these changes |
| 19 |
>> > will be judged according to a.o. how easy it is to implement them, how |
| 20 |
>> > standard they are, whether they conform to the gentoo way, etc. |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> This can be done if we have decided before if we want or not have a gentoo |
| 23 |
>> desktop touch. I don't think it is now decided. |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> I for one would like the possibility of automated menus. But I feel such a |
| 27 |
> system needs to be respectfull of what the wm developers use. This would mean |
| 28 |
> that some user visible changes (like different locations of files) need both |
| 29 |
> be made optional and need to be documented. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I totally agree on that. We don't want to goo too deep in technical/feature |
| 32 |
description. We could say : if the vanilla flag is not set, then by default we |
| 33 |
have a centralized menu, respectfull of each DE. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
>> > The general idea being that if it is possible everything should just work |
| 38 |
>> > after the emerge command has been completed. This also might involve |
| 39 |
>> > changing default configuration files to work with the way things are |
| 40 |
>> > installed in gentoo (like specifying the correct location of programs). |
| 41 |
>> > This does however not mean that just anything can be changed in the |
| 42 |
>> > default configurations. Look and feel should be as standard as possible. |
| 43 |
>> > (for example k3b should just work out of the box and know allready where |
| 44 |
>> > cdrecord is installed, etc.) |
| 45 |
>> |
| 46 |
>> The last example is not a desktop issue for me. It's the maintainer to do |
| 47 |
>> this, and to ask the cdrecord maintainer informations, if he needs it. |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> No, you're right (except that k3b falls under the resp. of -desktop), but the |
| 50 |
> general issue might be more prominent. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
yeah |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
-- |
| 55 |
dams |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
-- |
| 58 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives