A call to drop gnome

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
54 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

A call to drop gnome

Keith Bainbridge-3
Good afternoon


I've copied 2 bits from the discussion on synaptic and adding my 2 bobs'
worth towards the next review of whether gnome remains the default desktop.



On 15/4/19 9:31 pm, [hidden email] wrote:> Because GNOME. GNOME's
upstream said their word loud and clear, and that
 > word is - 'thou shall use Wayland for it is our favorite toy now'.



On 16/4/19 12:23 am, Jonathan Dowland wrote:>
 > The decision to ship GNOME as the default desktop is regularly
 > revisited: And
 > if a future GNOME release dropped X support altogether, you can be sure
 > that
 > would be a factor in the re-evaluation that would follow.


I've never been a fan of gnome, and I can only say that in the beginning
it was simply because I didn't yet know about themes etc. I settled for
KDE, in the 1990's.  I now know that it was the slowest of all, but I
found my way around easiest.

I changed desktops several times over the years, settling on Mate since
about 2014.

I'm always looking for a better way, so gave gnome a run. It lasted
until I found that I am not meant to be able to put the tool-bar where I
like it. It is possible, but...........   Smacks of os/x desktop; some
flexibility, but not everything is changeable. (Gore, even MS allows me
to move the tool-bar.)

Now Tomas quips about gnome is insisting that we like a new video
process, just because the team have decided to like it lots.

I say this is NOT freedom.

Of course new users accept the defaults on a fresh install - I guess
that like me 20 years ago, they presume the defaults will work best.


So, I am asking that gnome be dropped as an installation option (not
just as the default desktop) until they encourage freedom. Will I ever
try it again when it is a truly free?  Probably - in the name of looking
for a better way.  Never know - there maybe something that changes my
computing life totally.


By the bye, it's 16:52, and Autumn in my back yard. There are leaves all
over our footpaths.


--
Keith Bainbridge

[hidden email]
+61 (0)447 667 468

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Reco
        Hi.

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 04:54:02PM +1000, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> On 15/4/19 9:31 pm, [hidden email] wrote:> Because GNOME. GNOME's upstream
> said their word loud and clear, and that
> > word is - 'thou shall use Wayland for it is our favorite toy now'.

I wrote it, in reply to Thomas e-mail. Please watch who you quote.


> Now Tomas quips about gnome is insisting that we like a new video process,
> just because the team have decided to like it lots.

No. What I wrote that for several years you had the possibility to run
GNOME on Wayland. And it will be the default in the next stable Debian.
Because (and here you're correct) - upstream wants that everyone use the
GNOME that way.

You have the ability to run GNOME over X. For now. I predicted that such
ability may disappear in unspecified future (probably - years). Because
GNOME upstream is (in)famous for feature removal.


> I say this is NOT freedom.

The usual arguments apply.
Don't like it - patch it. Patches are welcome. They have the commit bit
- you do not. Etc.
And yes, there are some who did exactly that - Mate DE, Cinnamon DE to
name a few examples.


> So, I am asking that gnome be dropped as an installation option (not
> just as the default desktop) until they encourage freedom.

There's an appropriate place for such wishes, it's called
https://bugs.debian.org.

Reco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

andy smith-10
In reply to this post by Keith Bainbridge-3
Hello,

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 04:54:02PM +1000, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> I say this is NOT freedom.
>
> Of course new users accept the defaults on a fresh install - I guess that
> like me 20 years ago, they presume the defaults will work best.
>
>
> So, I am asking that gnome be dropped as an installation option (not just as
> the default desktop) until they encourage freedom.

Just so I understand correctly, is this a serious request to remove
the freedom of the current GNOME user base to install it, in order
to encourage the GNOME project to be more free?

As in, it is not enough that an ignorant GNOME user might stumble
across something they can't configure and decide to explore other
desktop environments: they must be prevented from initially using
GNOME, instead being forcibly introduced to some other DE and only
able to use GNOME by installing it later with the package manager?

Perhaps I have misunderstood, but if I haven't, which DE do you
think should be the new default? Would it be Mate as you use now, or
some other?

Cheers,
Andy

--
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

tomas@tuxteam.de
In reply to this post by Keith Bainbridge-3
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 04:54:02PM +1000, Keith Bainbridge wrote:
> Good afternoon

[...]

> On 15/4/19 9:31 pm, [hidden email] wrote:> Because GNOME. GNOME's
> upstream said their word loud and clear, and that
> > word is - 'thou shall use Wayland for it is our favorite toy now'.

As Reco said, this wasn't me.

> I've never been a fan of gnome [...]

Similar for me (well, I was a fan shortly up to Gnome 2).

[...]

> Now Tomas quips about gnome is insisting that we like a new video
> process, just because the team have decided to like it lots.

This sentence doesn't make much sense to me. What do you want to
say there?

> I say this is NOT freedom.

Hm.

> So, I am asking that gnome be dropped as an installation option (not
> just as the default desktop) [...]

Thanks $DEITY you aren't taking decisions. It seems to me that your
"freedom" would be much more restrictive that what we have now.

Hey. Debian's not perfect, by a long stretch. But anyone can
contribute. Forbidding to package a piece of free software,
as you suggest above, won't fly in Debian, and this is a Good
Thing.

What have you packaged for Debian?

> By the bye, it's 16:52, and Autumn in my back yard. There are leaves
> all over our footpaths.

Amen.

Cheers
-- tomás

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Gian Uberto Lauri-2
In reply to this post by Reco
>>>>> "R" == Reco  <[hidden email]> writes:

R> No. What I wrote that for several years you had the possibility to
R> run GNOME on Wayland. And it will be the default in the next stable
R> Debian.  Because (and here you're correct) - upstream wants that
R> everyone use the GNOME that way.

As long as using X is supported without requiring triple backward
sommersault to install it, fine. Almost fine. Because HW support stuff
should be independent from the user front end.

>> I say this is NOT freedom.

R> The usual arguments apply.  Don't like it - patch it. Patches are
R> welcome.

Say, "can you translate Odissey from ancient greek to Rovigo dialect?"

That is a petty example (if you can, my kudos!), patching is not a
thing this easy to do. You have to be a programmer good enought, then
you have to understando how the program works and how to change
it. Then you have to write the changes and possibly test it against
existing test cases, it requires skills, it requires time.

Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it. But there are
other users, not this unskilled but lacking, who knows, time and
wishing nevertheless that some option was available, say, running
WindowMaker on top of Gnome daemons. And for those there should be at
least a good document about doing it. And not leaving them being
forced to do something like a "triple backward sommersault" for doing
these changes.

This is more a "distribution level" choice, like "install Debian
Desktop something like a (better and improved) 1999 machine", at
least with the configuration working the old way.

It is not easy, it requires resources too. But these are my two cents.

--
 /\           ___                                    Ubuntu: ancient
/___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_____               African word
  //--\| | \|  |   Integralista GNUslamico            meaning "I can
\/                 coltivatore diretto di software       not install
     già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...                Debian"

Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Gian Uberto Lauri-2
In reply to this post by andy smith-10
>>>>> "AS" == Andy Smith <[hidden email]> writes:

AS> Hello, On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 04:54:02PM +1000, Keith Bainbridge
AS> wrote:
>> I say this is NOT freedom.
>>
>> Of course new users accept the defaults on a fresh install - I
>> guess that like me 20 years ago, they presume the defaults will
>> work best.
>>
>>
>> So, I am asking that gnome be dropped as an installation option
>> (not just as the default desktop) until they encourage freedom.

AS> Just so I understand correctly, is this a serious request to
AS> remove the freedom of the current GNOME user base to install it,
AS> in order to encourage the GNOME project to be more free?

I think that is more "let there an option to have a desktop machine
without gnome as default". Something like this:

"Gnome Desktop (suggested)"
"Desktop box w/o gnome (brave experienced users").

The second option should probably ask for more options.

--
 /\           ___                                    Ubuntu: ancient
/___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_____               African word
  //--\| | \|  |   Integralista GNUslamico            meaning "I can
\/                 coltivatore diretto di software       not install
     già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...                Debian"

Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Reco
In reply to this post by Gian Uberto Lauri-2
        Hi.

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:38:38AM +0000, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote:
> >>>>> "R" == Reco  <[hidden email]> writes:

I *have* to object to this ☺ In C this comparison equals false.
Have you meant '"R" = Reco' (i.e. assignment)?


> R> No. What I wrote that for several years you had the possibility to
> R> run GNOME on Wayland. And it will be the default in the next stable
> R> Debian.  Because (and here you're correct) - upstream wants that
> R> everyone use the GNOME that way.
>
> As long as using X is supported without requiring triple backward
> sommersault to install it, fine. Almost fine. Because HW support stuff
> should be independent from the user front end.

As we saw two weeks ago, the decision to run GNOME on Wayland backfired
at synaptic. To rephrase, why bother running X if there are no
applications left to run on X?


> >> I say this is NOT freedom.
>
> R> The usual arguments apply.  Don't like it - patch it. Patches are
> R> welcome.
>
> Say, "can you translate Odissey from ancient greek to Rovigo dialect?"

Nope. But I can pay to someone who does, assuming that I want such
translation. Same as everyone else.


> That is a petty example (if you can, my kudos!), patching is not a
> thing this easy to do. You have to be a programmer good enought, then
> you have to understando how the program works and how to change
> it. Then you have to write the changes and possibly test it against
> existing test cases, it requires skills, it requires time.

... and there are those who did it already. But then again, for me GNOME
project went off-rails (usability POV, not a technical one) long time
ago. Patching the GNOME to restore sane behaviour is harder than
avoiding it.


> Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it.

I recall hearing similar rhetoric 25 years ago. Some Operating System
who's name starts with big W, and it had 4-color flag for logo. Some
say that rise in popularity of said OS involved an unspecified amount of
unconventional off-market negotiations and a bag of dirty tricks.


> But there are other users, not this unskilled but lacking, who knows,
> time and wishing nevertheless that some option was available, say,
> running WindowMaker on top of Gnome daemons.

A neat idea BTW.


> And for those there should be at least a good document about doing
> it.

Agreed.


> And not leaving them being forced to do something like a "triple
> backward sommersault" for doing these changes.

The way things go right now with the GNOME all those impressive tricks
will be obsolete. Unless, of course, some kind soul moves that "sway"
thing from the experimental to sid.
Because AFAIK there are only four "Wayland window managers" (it's
techically incorrect to call them that, I know), and only two of them
made into buster so far (GNOME's mutter and weston, the reference one).

Reco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Jude DaShiell-3
In reply to this post by Keith Bainbridge-3
On Tue, 16 Apr 2019, Keith Bainbridge wrote:

> Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 02:54:02
> From: Keith Bainbridge <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: A call to drop gnome
> Resent-Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 07:12:08 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: [hidden email]
>
> Good afternoon
>
>
> I've copied 2 bits from the discussion on synaptic and adding my 2 bobs' worth
> towards the next review of whether gnome remains the default desktop.
>
>
>
> On 15/4/19 9:31 pm, [hidden email] wrote:> Because GNOME. GNOME's upstream
> said their word loud and clear, and that
> > word is - 'thou shall use Wayland for it is our favorite toy now'.
>
>
>
> On 16/4/19 12:23 am, Jonathan Dowland wrote:>
> > The decision to ship GNOME as the default desktop is regularly
> > revisited: And
> > if a future GNOME release dropped X support altogether, you can be sure
> > that
> > would be a factor in the re-evaluation that would follow.
>
>
> I've never been a fan of gnome, and I can only say that in the beginning it
> was simply because I didn't yet know about themes etc. I settled for KDE, in
> the 1990's.  I now know that it was the slowest of all, but I found my way
> around easiest.
>
> I changed desktops several times over the years, settling on Mate since about
> 2014.
>
> I'm always looking for a better way, so gave gnome a run. It lasted until I
> found that I am not meant to be able to put the tool-bar where I like it. It
> is possible, but...........   Smacks of os/x desktop; some flexibility, but
> not everything is changeable. (Gore, even MS allows me to move the tool-bar.)
>
> Now Tomas quips about gnome is insisting that we like a new video process,
> just because the team have decided to like it lots.
>
> I say this is NOT freedom.
>
> Of course new users accept the defaults on a fresh install - I guess that like
> me 20 years ago, they presume the defaults will work best.
>
>
> So, I am asking that gnome be dropped as an installation option (not just as
> the default desktop) until they encourage freedom. Will I ever try it again
> when it is a truly free?  Probably - in the name of looking for a better way.
> Never know - there maybe something that changes my computing life totally.
>
>
> By the bye, it's 16:52, and Autumn in my back yard. There are leaves all over
> our footpaths.
>
>
>

--

Wayland if what I read on debian-accessibility list is correct has
unsolved screen reader accessibility problems.  Since I came into Linux
mostly using the command line such a switch would have a limited impact
since when I do use any part of the graphical user interface environment
it's to do things the command line environment can't.  I have X with mate
running on this machine now and a case in point came up yesterday.
Logging into youtube-viewer has to be done with a graphical browser since
the command line alternatives do not do javascript.  Now the log in url
google requires is over 200 characters long which is no picnic typing.
So with the help of others on the blinux-list I came up with a set of
instructions to get this done.  For me, only possible since X works as
well as it now does.  So unless or until Wayland gets its accessibility
act cleaned up, removal of X will not be a minor event for me and others
in the screen reader accessibility user community.  Linux is getting more
and more like Microsoft in this respect.  Those who used to use MSdos 6.22
and remember what happened afterwards with MSDOS 7.0 with Microsoft and
how Microsoft mishandled that know what I'm talking about here.  Earlier
much in Linux was based on real choices users could make now Linus
Torvalds is arguing for standardization of the linux desktop.  Earlier I
worked for the Navy before NMCI came into existence and that was back in
the day when depending on what base you called home you'd likely be
running different software and different operating systems.  That
non-standardization from a security perspective probably made it more
difficult for the malware writers to do their work.  With NMCI and what
NMCI emanated it's either a specific version of windows or Linux for the
really important equipment system-wide.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Gian Uberto Lauri-2
In reply to this post by Reco
>>>>> "R" == Reco  <[hidden email]> writes:


R> As we saw two weeks ago, the decision to run GNOME on Wayland
R> backfired at synaptic. To rephrase, why bother running X if there
R> are no applications left to run on X?

Because I like and I use a lot remote display. Because I prefer it
user program.

If you have only your machine, having or not having "network
transparency" does not matter. If you live in a network, it matters.

>> Say, "can you translate Odissey from ancient greek to Rovigo
>> dialect?"

R> Nope. But I can pay to someone who does, assuming that I want such
R> translation. Same as everyone else.

Theoretically true. I have no idea on how well did perform "feature
rewards"

R> ... and there are those who did it already. But then again, for me
R> GNOME project went off-rails (usability POV, not a technical one)
R> long time ago. Patching the GNOME to restore sane behaviour is
R> harder than avoiding it.

And that's usually my option.

>> Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it.

R> I recall hearing similar rhetoric 25 years ago. Some Operating
R> System who's name starts with big W, and it had 4-color flag for
R> logo. Some say that rise in popularity of said OS involved an
R> unspecified amount of unconventional off-market negotiations and a
R> bag of dirty tricks.

And a band of rebels gathering around a penguin totem in the name of
freedom.

Gnome at least should not chain them in proprietary software.

R> The way things go right now with the GNOME all those impressive
R> tricks will be obsolete. Unless, of course, some kind soul moves
R> that "sway" thing from the experimental to sid.  Because AFAIK
R> there are only four "Wayland window managers" (it's techically
R> incorrect to call them that, I know), and only two of them made
R> into buster so far (GNOME's mutter and weston, the reference one).

Add one more reason to use X.

I use WindowMaker. My wife Afterstep maybe.

Our next project is re-building a new box that plays videos[*] in
sequence. The box has to play a video, them a short slideshow, then a
video...

Proto version is my laptop. 4 kg and lately has some issues with booting.

First production version, made by my wife, used a custom AfterStep
configuration to create the interface to start the loop, stop the loop
and stop the machine. Sadly HW died.

Next version should add the feature to add movies and pics from your
phone over Wifi. Recreating the UI because there is no configurable
window manager available is... ahem... undesired.

Give us X, mplayer, the slideshow module from xscreensaver and some django
stuff, and we are ready to run the box.

--
 /\           ___                                    Ubuntu: ancient
/___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_____               African word
  //--\| | \|  |   Integralista GNUslamico            meaning "I can
\/                 coltivatore diretto di software       not install
     già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...                Debian"

Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO

P.S.

[*] for those curious about which videos, here are some:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoamkaBjQ3o
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGX3wCTAc5U       
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdluU1ROpjI

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Gene Heskett-4
In reply to this post by Reco
On Tuesday 16 April 2019 07:01:25 Reco wrote:

> Hi.
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:38:38AM +0000, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote:
> > >>>>> "R" == Reco  <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> I *have* to object to this ☺ In C this comparison equals false.
> Have you meant '"R" = Reco' (i.e. assignment)?
>
> > R> No. What I wrote that for several years you had the possibility
> > to R> run GNOME on Wayland. And it will be the default in the next
> > stable R> Debian.  Because (and here you're correct) - upstream
> > wants that R> everyone use the GNOME that way.
> >
> > As long as using X is supported without requiring triple backward
> > sommersault to install it, fine. Almost fine. Because HW support
> > stuff should be independent from the user front end.

Agreed.

> As we saw two weeks ago, the decision to run GNOME on Wayland
> backfired at synaptic. To rephrase, why bother running X if there are
> no applications left to run on X?

I think that must be in the back of their minds. But that is something
you never ever tell the frogs.

> > >> I say this is NOT freedom.

So do I.

> > R> The usual arguments apply.  Don't like it - patch it. Patches are
> > R> welcome.

I wondered how long it would take for that phrase to emerge, so everyone
in a position of control can hide behind it yet again.

> > Say, "can you translate Odissey from ancient greek to Rovigo
> > dialect?"
>
> Nope. But I can pay to someone who does, assuming that I want such
> translation. Same as everyone else.
>
> > That is a petty example (if you can, my kudos!), patching is not a
> > thing this easy to do. You have to be a programmer good enought,
> > then you have to understando how the program works and how to change
> > it. Then you have to write the changes and possibly test it against
> > existing test cases, it requires skills, it requires time.
>
> ... and there are those who did it already. But then again, for me
> GNOME project went off-rails (usability POV, not a technical one) long
> time ago. Patching the GNOME to restore sane behaviour is harder than
> avoiding it.

+1000!

Where the heck in its confusing menu's can I find a tab supporting
terminal so I can get something done? Go ahead, find it, my coffee needs
to cool anyway..

> > Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it.
>
> I recall hearing similar rhetoric 25 years ago. Some Operating System
> who's name starts with big W, and it had 4-color flag for logo. Some
> say that rise in popularity of said OS involved an unspecified amount
> of unconventional off-market negotiations and a bag of dirty tricks.

We all heard the same "sermon" and ran like hell because we already were
familiar with both their market controlling efforts and this same bag of
dirty tricks a bar of good soap has little effect because you simply
cannot make them palatable in a free market.

I see Linus is drifting back to his older style, issuing the desktop
people a whipping they are in need of over the weekend, saying 90% of
why linux doesn't control the desktop is that there is not a
standardized, one size fits all because it can do all things desktop.

> > But there are other users, not this unskilled but lacking, who
> > knows, time and wishing nevertheless that some option was available,
> > say, running WindowMaker on top of Gnome daemons.
>
> A neat idea BTW.
>
> > And for those there should be at least a good document about doing
> > it.
>
> Agreed.

+10 or more.

> > And not leaving them being forced to do something like a "triple
> > backward sommersault" for doing these changes.
>
> The way things go right now with the GNOME all those impressive tricks
> will be obsolete. Unless, of course, some kind soul moves that "sway"
> thing from the experimental to sid.
> Because AFAIK there are only four "Wayland window managers" (it's
> techically incorrect to call them that, I know), and only two of them
> made into buster so far (GNOME's mutter and weston, the reference
> one).
>
> Reco

I'm not advocating that TDE is THAT desired standardized desktop, but so
far it its  given me the tools to get the job done AND ITS STABLE. TDE
is a fork of kde at the 3.5 level, with litterally thousands of its bugs
fixed, something KDE has steadfastly refused to do unless it outright
crashed the machine in the life of KDE since 1.0.

So let me say this: If I can't run a desktop I am familiar with, AND
productive with, because wayland won't run it, theres always mke2fs.

This is still wheezy, because except for firefox, it Just Works.  Theres
another 2T drive with the latest stretch installed on it in this machine
and I was in the process of moving my stuff to it with the intention of
updating to Buster when it was declared stable. That came to a
screeching halt when I read that synaptic was gone from buster. What I
do next is still open for discussion. 3 of the 4 other machine tool
driving machines on my network are also on wheezy, with the 4th, an
r-pi-3b running a 3/4 ton lathe, running jessie, poorly. Good, realtime
kernels and armhf are not on the best of terms, yet I get power failure
to power failure uptimes.

Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Reco
        Hi.

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 09:35:32AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:

> > > R> The usual arguments apply.  Don't like it - patch it. Patches are
> > > R> welcome.
>
> I wondered how long it would take for that phrase to emerge, so everyone
> in a position of control can hide behind it yet again.
>
> > > Say, "can you translate Odissey from ancient greek to Rovigo
> > > dialect?"
> >
> > Nope. But I can pay to someone who does, assuming that I want such
> > translation. Same as everyone else.
> >
> > > That is a petty example (if you can, my kudos!), patching is not a
> > > thing this easy to do. You have to be a programmer good enought,
> > > then you have to understando how the program works and how to change
> > > it. Then you have to write the changes and possibly test it against
> > > existing test cases, it requires skills, it requires time.
> >
> > ... and there are those who did it already. But then again, for me
> > GNOME project went off-rails (usability POV, not a technical one) long
> > time ago. Patching the GNOME to restore sane behaviour is harder than
> > avoiding it.
>
> +1000!

Um, Gene. You are aware that I wrote both arguments, are you?


> > > Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it.
> >
> > I recall hearing similar rhetoric 25 years ago. Some Operating System
> > who's name starts with big W, and it had 4-color flag for logo. Some
> > say that rise in popularity of said OS involved an unspecified amount
> > of unconventional off-market negotiations and a bag of dirty tricks.
>
> We all heard the same "sermon" and ran like hell because we already were
> familiar with both their market controlling efforts and this same bag of
> dirty tricks a bar of good soap has little effect because you simply
> cannot make them palatable in a free market.
>
> I see Linus is drifting back to his older style, issuing the desktop
> people a whipping they are in need of over the weekend, saying 90% of
> why linux doesn't control the desktop is that there is not a
> standardized, one size fits all because it can do all things desktop.

A link please, LKML will suffice. If Linus is back after that CoC story
in all his former glory - I need to see this.

Reco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Reco
In reply to this post by Gian Uberto Lauri-2
        Hi.

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 12:35:29PM +0000, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote:
> >>>>> "R" == Reco  <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>
> R> As we saw two weeks ago, the decision to run GNOME on Wayland
> R> backfired at synaptic. To rephrase, why bother running X if there
> R> are no applications left to run on X?
>
> Because I like and I use a lot remote display. Because I prefer it
> user program.

So do I, occasionally. It's not a silver bullet, but does the job if the
target host two-three hops from you. Unless you're doing something
really strange like trying to watch the video via "ssh -X" (a hint -
don't).


> If you have only your machine, having or not having "network
> transparency" does not matter. If you live in a network, it matters.

And that's the thing. The network transparency some of us love and use
does not exist in Wayland.
They do offer some bastardized version of RDP, but it has no ability to
connect to an existing session, and there's nothing even remotely close
to my favorite "ssh -X".


> >> Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it.
>
> R> I recall hearing similar rhetoric 25 years ago. Some Operating
> R> System who's name starts with big W, and it had 4-color flag for
> R> logo. Some say that rise in popularity of said OS involved an
> R> unspecified amount of unconventional off-market negotiations and a
> R> bag of dirty tricks.
>
> And a band of rebels gathering around a penguin totem in the name of
> freedom.
>
> Gnome at least should not chain them in proprietary software.

I never said that members of GNOME project are Satan incarnates.
They write and distribute free (as in freedom) software. It's popular,
whenever it's due to the design or in spite of it.
What does ring some warning bells are methods (see above) that some of
those people utilize to gain that popularity, and a collateral damage to
non-GNOME software.

>
> R> The way things go right now with the GNOME all those impressive
> R> tricks will be obsolete. Unless, of course, some kind soul moves
> R> that "sway" thing from the experimental to sid.  Because AFAIK
> R> there are only four "Wayland window managers" (it's techically
> R> incorrect to call them that, I know), and only two of them made
> R> into buster so far (GNOME's mutter and weston, the reference one).
>
> Add one more reason to use X.

My main reason to continue to use X in buster. I got used to my openbox
setup.

Reco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Gene Heskett-4
In reply to this post by Reco
On Tuesday 16 April 2019 09:54:19 Reco wrote:

> Hi.
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 09:35:32AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > R> The usual arguments apply.  Don't like it - patch it. Patches
> > > > are R> welcome.
> >
> > I wondered how long it would take for that phrase to emerge, so
> > everyone in a position of control can hide behind it yet again.
> >
> > > > Say, "can you translate Odissey from ancient greek to Rovigo
> > > > dialect?"
> > >
> > > Nope. But I can pay to someone who does, assuming that I want such
> > > translation. Same as everyone else.
> > >
> > > > That is a petty example (if you can, my kudos!), patching is not
> > > > a thing this easy to do. You have to be a programmer good
> > > > enought, then you have to understando how the program works and
> > > > how to change it. Then you have to write the changes and
> > > > possibly test it against existing test cases, it requires
> > > > skills, it requires time.
> > >
> > > ... and there are those who did it already. But then again, for me
> > > GNOME project went off-rails (usability POV, not a technical one)
> > > long time ago. Patching the GNOME to restore sane behaviour is
> > > harder than avoiding it.
> >
> > +1000!
>
> Um, Gene. You are aware that I wrote both arguments, are you?

I thought it was a bit odd, but so many are using broken quoting, so I
shrugged it off.

>
> > > > Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it.
> > >
> > > I recall hearing similar rhetoric 25 years ago. Some Operating
> > > System who's name starts with big W, and it had 4-color flag for
> > > logo. Some say that rise in popularity of said OS involved an
> > > unspecified amount of unconventional off-market negotiations and a
> > > bag of dirty tricks.
> >
> > We all heard the same "sermon" and ran like hell because we already
> > were familiar with both their market controlling efforts and this
> > same bag of dirty tricks a bar of good soap has little effect
> > because you simply cannot make them palatable in a free market.
> >
> > I see Linus is drifting back to his older style, issuing the desktop
> > people a whipping they are in need of over the weekend, saying 90%
> > of why linux doesn't control the desktop is that there is not a
> > standardized, one size fits all because it can do all things
> > desktop.
>
> A link please, LKML will suffice. If Linus is back after that CoC
> story in all his former glory - I need to see this.
>
> Reco

I got unsubbed from lkml a couple years back for "interference". Seems
like I read it on /. 2, maybe 3 days back. I don't think I'd call it
former glory, but some leakage and frustration are quite evident. He was
IMO. overdoing the nice guy bit just a bit. He needs to add a bit more
iron to his control. I see the lack of that over the last year as being
partially responsible for this present bruhaha. Or maybe thats just me?  
Your call. :)

Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

mick crane
In reply to this post by Keith Bainbridge-3
Not sure what this is about.
Isn't a desktop manager, display environment whatever its called a way
to present icons that you can click on and it starts a program you want
to use and then gets out of the way ?
Is this about having common libraries that control what appears on the
screen ?
Am I likely to not be able to use Xming at some future date ?

mick


--
Key ID    4BFEBB31

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Greg Wooledge
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 03:41:28PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> Not sure what this is about.
> Isn't a desktop manager, display environment whatever its called a way to
> present icons that you can click on and it starts a program you want to use
> and then gets out of the way ?

A window manager is a program that allows the placement and resizing of
windows, and controls which one is "on top", and so on.  There are lot of
window managers, and many of them offer a whole bunch of features like
menus, icons, program activation from either of those, binding of keys
to actions, etc.

A desktop environment is a window manager PLUS a whole crapload of
additional stuff that I do not personally understand.  But it's really big
and really complicated.  Like, for example, fvwm has an installed-size of
about 6.5 megabytes.  How big is GNOME?  I wouldn't be surprised if it's
two orders of magnitude larger than that, just for its "core" components,
not counting a bunch of games or whatever else can be added on.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Gian Uberto Lauri-2
In reply to this post by Reco
>>>>> "R" == Reco  <[hidden email]> writes:

>> Add one more reason to use X.

R> My main reason to continue to use X in buster. I got used to my
R> openbox setup.

Same here. Switched to WindoMaker in 1996 because we had only 256
colors available and it could "render many color using a little number
of elements in a colormap" by doing what pointillist painters did with
the few allowed colors. Maybe younger users never experienced some
strange effects we had when some programs, like netscape, resorted to
use a special colormap, WindowMaker reduced these things a lot
allowing you to have a colorful desktop.

One of the demo color theme was "Rainbow", and it was possible to use
it without overloading the standard colormap. I still use that color
theme, even if I have to recreate it.

--
 /\           ___                                    Ubuntu: ancient
/___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_____               African word
  //--\| | \|  |   Integralista GNUslamico            meaning "I can
\/                 coltivatore diretto di software       not install
     già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...                Debian"

Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO

P.S.
And now instead of a single daemon we have a herd of daemons.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Reco
In reply to this post by Greg Wooledge
        Hi.

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:54:06AM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote:
> Like, for example, fvwm has an installed-size of
> about 6.5 megabytes.  How big is GNOME?  I wouldn't be surprised if it's
> two orders of magnitude larger than that, just for its "core" components,
> not counting a bunch of games or whatever else can be added on.

# apt install -o APT::Install-Recommends=0 gnome-core
...
Need to get 187 MB of archives.
After this operation, 654 MB of additional disk space will be used.

I'd say that your estimate hit bullseye.

And adding the bells and whistles, it's four orders of magnitude of your
fvwm install:

# apt install -o APT::Install-Recommends=1 -o APT::Install-Suggests=1 gnome
...
Need to get 5,260 MB of archives.
After this operation, 18.4 GB of additional disk space will be used.

Reco

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Matthew Crews-2
In reply to this post by Reco
On 4/16/19 6:54 AM, Reco wrote:
>> I see Linus is drifting back to his older style, issuing the desktop
>> people a whipping they are in need of over the weekend, saying 90% of
>> why linux doesn't control the desktop is that there is not a
>> standardized, one size fits all because it can do all things desktop.
>
> A link please, LKML will suffice. If Linus is back after that CoC story
> in all his former glory - I need to see this.

Old news. He posted two days ago about Linux Kernel 5.1-rc5:

https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/14/265


As far as Gnome on Wayland, X.org's days are numbered, and for good reason.

The major DEs are all pushing for the move to Wayland, but they continue
to support X because Wayland isn't fully ready. However it cannot be
made ready unless people are actually using it in the wild, and
submitting feedback.

Additionally, every major Linux distro supports Wayland, provided their
chosen DE supports Wayland. Some major ones even USE Wayland by default
where possible. It will not be long before X is deprecated, and then
fully removed.

This all stems back to Synaptic being removed from Debian Buster right?
Well, all someone needs to do is update Synaptic with proper Wayland
support. But judging by the upstream development, it appears that
Synaptic might be abandoned?

https://launchpad.net/synaptic

Well, it's maintained by an Ubuntu developer, and Ubuntu doesn't even
ship Synaptic anymore.

All the same, hardly a reason to drop Gnome.

My 2¢

-Matt


signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Ansgar Burchardt-9
In reply to this post by Gene Heskett-4
Gene Heskett writes:
> Where the heck in its confusing menu's can I find a tab supporting
> terminal so I can get something done? Go ahead, find it, my coffee needs
> to cool anyway..

You press the magic Super key, then type "Terminal" on the keyboard (or
at least the beginning), then press Enter.  GNOME feels pretty much
designed to not be used by a mouse alone ;-)

Ansgar

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A call to drop gnome

Reco
In reply to this post by Matthew Crews-2
        Hi.

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 06:54:00PM +0200, Matthew Crews wrote:

> On 4/16/19 6:54 AM, Reco wrote:
> >> I see Linus is drifting back to his older style, issuing the desktop
> >> people a whipping they are in need of over the weekend, saying 90% of
> >> why linux doesn't control the desktop is that there is not a
> >> standardized, one size fits all because it can do all things desktop.
> >
> > A link please, LKML will suffice. If Linus is back after that CoC story
> > in all his former glory - I need to see this.
>
> Old news. He posted two days ago about Linux Kernel 5.1-rc5:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/14/265

Nah, that's not Linus. A double, probably.
I mean, there's the expression? Colorful language? Some profanity, at
the very least?


> As far as Gnome on Wayland, X.org's days are numbered, and for good reason.

And now it gets interesting.


> The major DEs are all pushing for the move to Wayland,

All two of them, I assume?


> but they continue to support X because Wayland isn't fully ready.

Ok.


> However it cannot be made ready unless people are actually using it in
> the wild, and submitting feedback.

That's understandable. I mean, code tests and Continuous Integration are
for the cowards, right? Real developers test their code on users. Both
GNOME and KDE are famous in this regard.


> Additionally, every major Linux distro supports Wayland, provided their
> chosen DE supports Wayland.

[Carefully looks at Debian 9, Ubuntu 18.10 and RHEL 7.5].
Sure. That's why they're offering X by default. To test Wayland. That's
a really cunning plan.


> Some major ones even USE Wayland by default where possible.

[Scratches head] SUSE? Surely that's what you meant?


> It will not be long before X is deprecated, and then
> fully removed.

All these sentences, but I failed to see this "good reason" of yours.


> This all stems back to Synaptic being removed from Debian Buster right?

In this particular thread we discuss a wish of a Debian User, who in no
uncertain terms expressed that GNOME should be dropped from the Debian.
I mean, look at the Subject.


> Well, all someone needs to do is update Synaptic with proper Wayland
> support.

And the reason for this being exactly what?


> But judging by the upstream development, it appears that
> Synaptic might be abandoned?

$ x-www-browser https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/synaptic
$ git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/mvo5/synaptic
$ cd synaptic
$ git log
commit 449180d2d1abbd49e113d882e8b9b6387321c4fa
Author: Michael Vogt <[hidden email]>
Date:   Mon Apr 15 11:14:51 2019 +0200

Nope, looks alive to me.

Reco

123