Sergey Udaltsov [2011-05-12 20:45 +0100]:
Technically, if the architecture only allows extension through
patching (instead of extension points), it means the architecture is
closed (that must be a highly offensive statement, if we're talking
about free software). Also, that is a very effective
Bastien Nocera wrote:
Feel free to follow the discussions about firewalls on the
fedora-desktop list. (...)
Shouldn't we try to have an appropriate @gnome.org list to discuss
such things (os level), if we consider that *desktop*-devel is not
the right venue? (like we #gnome-os on irc)
In a UDS session this week about this control center issue, one
discussed idea was a hard-coded (in source) whitelist or brightlist.
To be clear, a brightlist would be a set of plugins that appear at the
top as part of the OS and there's some other section where
everything else goes. A whitelist
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 09:56:26AM +0200, Michael Terry wrote:
Everyone wins, with exceedingly little technical effort. What do the
g-c-c maintainers feel about that?
So your suggestion is to still have new panels?
The purpose of no external API is not to make it more difficult, but to
On 12 May 2011 20:52, Sergey Udaltsov sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote:
For something like this, I have a feeling we may only get one chance. If
you don't allow any differentiation on top of GNOME, there is at least
one distribution that will just do preferences differently ignore
On 12 May 2011 17:05, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote:
I presume you'd be happy for Deja Dup to become a GNOME Control Center
panel?
Depends on what you mean. I'm happy for Deja Dup to be shown as a
panel in the control center. But it sounds like you're asking about
actually putting it in
On 13 May 2011 10:31, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
So your suggestion is to still have new panels?
Depending on whether you wanted to allow 3rd party panels, you could
use a brightlist or a whitelist. But yes, a public API coupled with a
whitelist to allow only design-approved external
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:47:52AM +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
I guess the questions like that will be discussed again and again. The
interaction between GNOME and distros is a very complex matter. On
Loads of distribution people are involved within GNOME. The only
problems occur with
Hi Martin,
Martin Pitt wrote:
Aside from that the technical issue remains that this does make it
harder to customize c-c to a downstream's needs, of course. It's
really good that the individual changes are being discussed here
(deja-dup, etc.), and perhaps for the case of Ubuntu One we can
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:46:51AM +0200, Michael Terry wrote:
Right. And this proposal was designed to allow each design team to
decide their own OS's experience easily by patching the whitelist.
The plan to drop the API adds a larger technical barrier that appears
artificial.
AFAIK, the
On 11 May 2011, at 17:52, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
One detail of Open if file manager is that it is trivial to make apps
call nautilus --blahblah, but ideally this should be cross-desktop
(and I imagine that Firefox and LibreOffice won't like to have
Gnome-specific stuff like that).
On 13 May 2011 09:49, Sergey Udaltsov sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote:
capplet only supports clone) and are very pleased that we can drop in
new capplets because it installs the library headers...
Thanks, Ross, for illustrating the real downstream POV. Do I understand it
right that gnome3
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:38:09AM +0200, Michael Terry wrote:
So the big question to GNOME is how much do ya'll want to avoid the
extra step of such collaboration for Features you consider part of
your core? Is that a hard-blocker? Who gets to decide if it is?
I'm theoretically open to
Distribution
differences are something to be avoided, not encouraged.
It is not for gnome to decide. See the messages from Ross. Differences are
inevitable. Let's embrace differences, let's minimise patches. Let's be
friendly to downstream.
Anyway, since distros are patching in their capplets -
On 13 May 2011 09:56, Dave Neary dne...@gnome.org wrote:
What preferences do you think you'll want to add to GNOME CC which
aren't currently planned, and how would you like to add them?
I happen to have a MeeGo 1.2 beta netbook on my desk, so this is
what's currently in our gnome-control-centre
Il giorno ven, 13/05/2011 alle 00.51 -0400, William Jon McCann ha
scritto:
How about: raison d'être. What is our mission, what is our reason for
existing? Is it to provide a gummy base for others to adapt, modify,
and differentiate?
No.
Your own vision of open source is totally
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:43:08AM +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote:
So IMHO choosing a priori what people can do and what people can't do
is... well, censorship, sorry. Matthias said maintaining meaningful
boundaries between what is GNOME and what is not. Of course this is a
way to maintain a
On 13 May 2011 11:53, Gendre Sebastien ko...@romandie.com wrote:
I'm agree with Luca: It would be better if split Déjà Dup with Gnome
Backup. Also, we can have:
- Gnome Backup as a G-C-C panel for Gnome Desktop.
- Déjà Dup as a GTK+ Application for non-Gnome Desktop, ex for XFCE.
One minor
Hi Michael,
Thanks for all of this. Let me reiterate that I *really* want to see
Deja Dup in 3.2. We just need to figure out how to make it work.
Michael Terry wrote:
On 12 May 2011 17:05, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote:
I presume you'd be happy for Deja Dup to become a GNOME Control
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 11:40:28AM +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
We do have a few exceptions at the moment, mostly in cross desktop
services stuff, of core components hosted elsewhere, from a quick
look at jhbuild core moduleset we have NetworkManager and
accountsservice on freedesktop,
On 13 May 2011 12:28, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote:
Would you be willing to use GNOME Bugzilla?
That specifically would be the hardest part of an infrastructure move.
Some important downstreams (Ubuntu and flavors) and my sister project
Duplicity are all in LP. So it's very easy to
Michael Terry wrote:
On 13 May 2011 12:28, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote:
Would you be willing to use GNOME Bugzilla?
That specifically would be the hardest part of an infrastructure move.
Some important downstreams (Ubuntu and flavors) and my sister project
Duplicity are all in LP.
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 08:58 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote:
Bastien Nocera wrote:
Feel free to follow the discussions about firewalls on the
fedora-desktop list. (...)
Shouldn't we try to have an appropriate @gnome.org list to discuss
such things (os level), if we consider that
Belatedly,
On 02/05/11 14:14, David Zeuthen wrote:
The workflow in an app (such as Evo) would be like this
accounts = goa.get_accounts_of_type('mail')
for a in accounts:
if a is OAuthBased:
(oauth_access_token, oauth_access_token_secret) =
a.OAuthBased.GetAccessToken()
elif
least. it has a painful transition, but it's working pretty fine for now.
Oh really? What is your criteria of success?
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:36:41PM +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
least. it has a painful transition, but it's working pretty fine for now.
Oh really? What is your criteria of success?
Let's not go into this type of yes/no discussion any further.
Seems continuing this discussion on
Right. All I asked from the start is documenting the current vision.
Seems continuing this discussion on desktop-devel-list is not going to
change anyones mind
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:28:25AM +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
Distribution
differences are something to be avoided, not encouraged.
It is not for gnome to decide. See the messages from Ross. Differences are
inevitable. Let's embrace differences, let's minimise patches. Let's be
friendly
Hello Dave,
Dave Neary [2011-05-13 10:56 +0200]:
What preferences do you think you'll want to add to GNOME CC which
aren't currently planned, and how would you like to add them?
In previous releases we had:
* Additional Drivers (jockey). This was exposed in control-center,
but only due to
On 2011-05-13 at 12:36, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
least. it has a painful transition, but it's working pretty fine for now.
Oh really? What is your criteria of success?
the most important release of the past 5 years of Gnome being
successful?
what is your metric of success for the previous
Il giorno ven, 13/05/2011 alle 12.16 +0200, Olav Vitters ha scritto:
The control-center maintainers made a quick API for GNOME 3.0 only.
Saying the removal is censorship?
Of course not a real world censorship, but something that resembles it.
System Settings is a place that can be useful to
Le vendredi 13 mai 2011 à 12:25 +0200, Michael Terry a écrit :
On 13 May 2011 11:53, Gendre Sebastien ko...@romandie.com wrote:
I'm agree with Luca: It would be better if split Déjà Dup with Gnome
Backup. Also, we can have:
- Gnome Backup as a G-C-C panel for Gnome Desktop.
- Déjà Dup as
Hi,
How is the accessibility support on the htm greater?
El 13/05/2011 14:59, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com escribió:
I'm proposing LightDM [1] as a replacement for GDM. I started the
proposal for this in GNOME 3.0 [2] but due to the young age of the
project I thought it better to wait
On 13 May 2011 15:19, Miguel de Icaza mig...@novell.com wrote:
Hello,
Why replace GDM?
What user-facing problem does this solve?
The main advantage I see to GNOME is to reduce the amount of GNOME
specific code that needs to be maintained. In terms of users, the
ability to implement a
Hello,
Why replace GDM?
What user-facing problem does this solve?
In general, GDM code is ugly not because of what it does, but to
prevent a wide range of security attacks that are attempted against
login managers.
Writing a login manager is not difficult, hardening one is.
May I suggest
Hi,
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Will Thompson
will.thomp...@collabora.co.uk wrote:
For example, for GMail, you can use the OAuth token when
authenticating the IMAP and SMTP connection cf.
http://code.google.com/apis/gmail/oauth/
This big-switch-statement-in-every-application approach
I don't see this happening. Are you talking about GNOME 3 or GNOME 2.x
here?
Gnome3, since gnome2 did not have the goal to define the final experience.
And it was more open.
The whole design part is new. My view is that we're way more friendly to
do things for downstream.
What kind of
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 03:26:00PM +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
That's what you want. Do distros want the same? Do 3rd party appdevs want
the same? Or do you just not care?
To all: This thread is getting too heated and personal for me to feel
comfortable to try and find ways to continue. So
Le vendredi 13 mai 2011 à 15:49 +0100, Sergey Udaltsov a écrit :
If that is a bad excuse for the heated discussion, at least that
explains why it is hot.
If I summarize the choice of Gnome Dev about panel by an exemple: The
choice of operating system to boot at startup. They don't want to see a
On 13 May 2011 13:01, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote:
There are good reasons for wanting to have Deja Dup on GNOME Bugzilla, I
think. I can imagine myself wanting to CC other GNOME contributors on
Deja Dup bugs. I can also imagine bugs being punted between Deja Dup and
other GNOME
Le vendredi 13 mai 2011 à 17:28 +0200, Gendre Sebastien a écrit :
And if we more summarize: They don't want to have too much of redundant
panels for same features and with different UI logic. They prefer to
have 1 panel with some different back-end.
I don't think this way is bad.
It is a
Hi,
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm proposing LightDM [1] as a replacement for GDM. I started the
proposal for this in GNOME 3.0 [2] but due to the young age of the
project I thought it better to wait until 3.2 before making a full
proposal.
Hi,
(speaking again as one of the three GDM maintainers)
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com wrote:
Why replace GDM?
- LightDM is a cross-platform solution.
What platforms does LightDM support that GDM doesn't? Are they
platforms GNOME is targetting? Not
Luca Ferretti wrote:
snip
Luca, I don't want to be rude, but you, Sergey, David, Emmanuele, and
everyone else who has contributed multiple times to this thread in the
past 24 hours have had your say, you've been heard. You're now just
repeating yourself.
Please stop polluting my in-box. As
Hi,
Sugar recently switched to metacity as its window manager. There are
some rough edges left to be solved.
I wrote a relatively simple metacity patch which fixes one of these:
Sugar needs the ability to disable the alt-tab handler so that it can
implement its own. metacity already has a
2011/5/13 Luca Ferretti lferr...@gnome.org:
Bonus question: are you sure this all work happens upstream can lead
to better and faster solutions?
I forgot a little example for this: 3 years ago I wrote
a trivial patch to add a Search tool selector in Preferred Application
preference tool. Start
Hi Daniel,
I'm not a MC-Developer, but MC has been replaced by Mutter for GNOME 3,
so that may be the reason why there's no response on your report.
Chris
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Hi,
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Daniel Drake d...@laptop.org wrote:
Having not heard anything, I emailed the maintainer on March 8th,
politely asking for a review - no response.
Best bet is to ping marnanel on irc.
--Ray
___
desktop-devel-list
On 13 May 2011 18:32, Ray Strode halfl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
(speaking again as one of the three GDM maintainers)
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 8:59 AM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com
wrote:
Why replace GDM?
- LightDM is a cross-platform solution.
What platforms does LightDM support
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 10:28, Gendre Sebastien ko...@romandie.com wrote:
If I summarize the choice of Gnome Dev about panel by an exemple: The
choice of operating system to boot at startup. They don't want to see a
panel for manage Grub, a panel to manage Lilo, a panel to manage EFI,
etc. But
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 18:44 +0200, Luca Ferretti wrote:
2011/5/13 Luca Ferretti lferr...@gnome.org:
Bonus question: are you sure this all work happens upstream can lead
to better and faster solutions?
I forgot a little example for this: 3 years ago I wrote
a trivial patch to add a Search
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 10:05 +0100, Calum Benson wrote:
As an aside, the terminology that most OS X apps have settled on for
this feature is either Reveal in Finder or Show in Finder, rather
than Open in Finder (Finder being the Mac's file manager). I guess
those verbs make it sound more like
Hi,
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com wrote:
Note that LightDM is not lighter in features, but in architecture.
And a different focus, right? GDM is firmly a GNOME project, designed
to integrate and work well with GNOME. LightDM is designed with the
idea
Hi Michael,
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Michael Terry m...@mterry.name wrote:
For the next major version (20.0), I've done a redesign aimed at
making it more invisible and appear as part of the OS. I've made it
live just as a control center panel and removed some branding to look
a bit
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com wrote:
There have been problems for years and years and years. There is some
point where you need to reconsider if that strategy is appropriate.
So here's some actual data:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com wrote:
I was not going to propose this project because I am sick of this sort
of unprofessional response, especially from leaders in the community.
It was the insistence of other leaders in the GNOME community that I
did
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 18:19 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com
wrote:
I was not going to propose this project because I am sick of this sort
of unprofessional response, especially from leaders in the community.
So, you
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 14:59 +0200, Robert Ancell wrote:
Why replace GDM?
- LightDM is a cross-platform solution.
Will KDE replace kdm with LightDM or drop its non-greeter code in favor
of LightDM? Are there any interesting discussions in the other camp
that you can point us to?
Florian
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 01:41 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 20:06 -0400, Shaun McCance wrote:
On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 18:14 -0400, David Zeuthen wrote:
Why? Because the premise of System Settings in GNOME 3 is,
surprisingly, to change your system settings or personalize
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 17:37 +0200, Michael Terry wrote:
So what does being a core module/Feature really buy here? (I mean,
benefits above and beyond the goodness of being on GNOME
infrastructure, which I could have without being a core module.) I
see the following, but I may have missed
Il giorno Fri, 13/05/2011 alle 18.42 +0200, Dave Neary ha scritto:
Please stop polluting my in-box. As many others have said, this thread
is going no-where, please just stop posting to it.
This could be true, we are discussing about ideas and visions and anyone
has his strong option. But
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 18:19 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@gmail.com
wrote:
I was not going to propose this project because I am sick of this sort
of
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Simos Xenitellis
simos.li...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 18:19 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM, Robert Ancell robert.
I believe this is a
Il giorno Sat, 14/05/2011 alle 01.11 +0200, Luca Ferretti ha scritto:
Il giorno Fri, 13/05/2011 alle 18.42 +0200, Dave Neary ha scritto:
Please stop polluting my in-box. As many others have said, this thread
is going no-where, please just stop posting to it.
This could be true, we are
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 10:05 +0100, Calum Benson wrote:
On 11 May 2011, at 17:52, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
One detail of Open if file manager is that it is trivial to make apps
call nautilus --blahblah, but ideally this should be cross-desktop
(and I imagine that Firefox and
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 06:55:50PM +0200, Robert Ancell wrote:
I was not going to propose this project because I am sick of this sort
of unprofessional response, especially from leaders in the community.
People have to follow the Code of Conduct on mailing lists and GNOME
Bugzilla. On those, it
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 13:43 -0500, Brian Cameron wrote:
Robert:
I am one of the 3 GDM maintainers. I think there is a real need for
LightDM as a FreeDesktop module, so I think it is great that LightDM
has joined the FreeDesktop family.
GDM has evolved into a display manager that is most
On Sat, 2011-05-14 at 12:13 +1200, John Stowers wrote:
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 10:05 +0100, Calum Benson wrote:
On 11 May 2011, at 17:52, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
One detail of Open if file manager is that it is trivial to make apps
call nautilus --blahblah, but ideally this should
On 13 May 2011 21:50, Colin Walters walt...@verbum.org wrote:
Deja Dup could definitely qualify pretty easily as a Featured
Application; see:
https://live.gnome.org/TwoPointNinetyone/FeaturedApps
I had thought it was a Featured App already. When modulesets got
redesigned during my previous
Ray Strode wrote:
2) Giving GDM a more of a GNOME 3 look and feel (as per the mockups
you already mentioned elsewhere in the thread)
The other points are also important, and could certainly be added to
the feature page, but this one is explicitely cited (see
70 matches
Mail list logo
