[blfs-support] Latest news in GNOME world

Armin K. krejzi at email.com
Sun Nov 11 01:56:40 PST 2012


On 11/11/2012 10:10 AM, Simon Geard wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-11-10 at 00:00 +0100, Armin K. wrote:
>> I forgot to mention that it is becoming more and more integrated with
>> systemd for user session management, so it is just matter of time where
>> systemd will be required.
>
> Yeah, that's true enough. I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing
> though - they're asking the question "how do we do this now?" rather
> than "how would we have done this twenty years ago?" And I don't have a
> problem with that - ignoring the lessons of the past is a bad thing, but
> so is using them as an excuse to not try anything new.
>

I have no problems with it either, but LFS/BLFS people seem to reject 
systemd (for now).

>> Have you ever looked at what GNOME Shell looks like? It looks nearly the
>> same as the stuff on smart phones (Android, iOS) or, at least, it
>> behaves like it. You can look at youtube or google pictures and see what
>> I am talking about.
>
> Um, are we talking about the same Gnome Shell? Because speaking as an
> everyday Shell user - no, no it doesn't. There's no resemblance in
> behaviour, nor in appearance unless you think the panel being black
> counts...
>

With every release, GNOME Shell becomes different in some ways. Latest 
3.6 release has been reworked and now you have to move your mouse on the 
upper right edge of the screen and click on the button to get menus. 
Another anoying thing is that you can't run most of 2 same apps at the 
same time if you single click on them on, lets say, menu or favourites. 
You have to do right click and select new window. Yes, panels look like 
in mobile world as does icons on "menu" or whatever that's called - big 
and taking away whole screen. Exception is the categories on right side.

The one thing I actualy hate about GNOME 3 is that they ripped away lot 
of configuration options that were actualy available in GNOME 2. You 
have to dig through gsettings or gnome-tweak-tool (which is not 
installed by default on many distros nor is part of GNOME core) in order 
to get something right.

The thing that I personally cannot forgive them is that they *seem* to 
introduce new bugs to find excuse to remove features that "they hate" 
(you can see one of screenshots from guadec in link that points to 
nautilus review or whatever).

Nautilus feature that lot of users demanded useful was removed with two 
reasons being "We all hate it" and "it does not work on touch". If it 
doesn,t work, then fix it dammit!

> Seriously, I don't get why people think G3 is something weird and alien.
> It's not - it's a traditional desktop in almost every way, barring the
> use of the Activities pane for launching apps. There's really nothing
> all that odd about it.
>
>>
>> Now, we are responsible for PC world, not touch world and GNOME will
>> soon have no place in PC world if it continues like this.
>
> Pretty much every major desktop manufacturer is bringing out hardware
> with a touch-screen these days, part of supporting Windows 8. Are you
> sure there's such a difference between the two?
>
> Besides, Gnome's touch support is actually pretty poor still - all those
> conventional drop-down menus are impossible to use with fat fingers. And
> the reason it's poor is that despite what so many people claim, it's
> *not* designed as a touch interface. It's a regular desktop, running all
> the regular desktop apps.
>

Yet they seem to "improve" it by ripping apart lot of useful stuff.

>> (Found the GNOME 4 news
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTE0ODg)
>
> Eh, Phoronix... not what I'd call the most reliable source... one step
> up from an advertising link farm. But still, so we have a couple of
> Gnome devs who think that a focus on mobile and touch is a good idea.
> That's not exactly official policy announcement, and there's really not
> very much discussion on those lines on any of the Gnome mailing lists...
>
> Simon.

I guess this was actualy talked on GUADEC. No plans are yet made for it. 
And I said "... might become ..."




More information about the blfs-support mailing list