Hi,
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 05:15:37PM +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
Provocative question: is there any way that some unbiased survey would
change the emphasis of development from gnome-shell to the fallback mode?
And
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 08:01:53AM +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
Ok, thanks for the reasonable answer. Don't you think it would make
sense for the GNOME to conduct such review officially? And perhaps
explicitly exclude GNOME developers from participation, to make it
unbiased;)
This was
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 9:21 AM, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 01:09:18AM +0200, Mark wrote:
Some facts.
1. Gnome wants feedback but any feedback gathered online is non
representative. It has to be gathered from a non biased site like
cnn.com-_- guess the
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 09:58:15AM +0200, Mark wrote:
False
false
False
false
False
false
False
and false
You are false in all false points. The points are all from messages in this
thread so i recommend you to read back on the list since you obviously
missed something.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Alan Cox a...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk wrote:
There's been a lot of work done to improve GNOME 3 over the last 6
months. A lot of the complaints of GNOME 3.0 have been already
addressed. Why not just do it after (even more!) distros ship GNOME
3.2?
The first
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 04:54:12PM +0200, Mark wrote:
FYI: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTAwMjY
Useless.
--
Regards,
Olav
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 17:27 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 04:54:12PM +0200, Mark wrote:
FYI: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTAwMjY
Useless.
Web surveys are guaranteed to self-select, and I have to imagine a
survey hosted on phoronix self-selects a
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 10:35:24AM -0500, Dan Williams wrote:
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 17:27 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 04:54:12PM +0200, Mark wrote:
FYI: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_itempx=MTAwMjY
Useless.
Web surveys are guaranteed to
On 18 October 2011 16:52, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
Such actions just confirms that the effort was not an honest intention
to gather feedback. Just to confirm own thoughts.
I don't think many of us on this list thought the intention of the
survey was to highlight areas needing
It's useless to me because there's nothing actionable there. The
survey results don't give us anything to do except die in a fire.
--
Jasper
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Would anybody have time to prepare some useful survey?
Provocative question: is there any way that some unbiased survey would
change the emphasis of development from gnome-shell to the fallback mode?
And increase the configurability and so on.. Or - the current strategy is
unchangeable
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 17:15 +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
Provocative question: is there any way that some unbiased survey would
change the emphasis of development from gnome-shell to the fallback
mode? And increase the configurability and so on.. Or - the current
strategy is unchangeable
Iirc the fallback mode is using new gtk and stuff... why is it obsolete?
I was asking looking at the anger and nostalgie expressed on phoronix.
On Oct 18, 2011 5:29 p.m., Cosimo Cecchi cosi...@gnome.org wrote:
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 17:15 +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
Provocative question: is
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Sergey Udaltsov
sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote:
Iirc the fallback mode is using new gtk and stuff... why is it obsolete?
AFAIK the goal was to only maintain it until the very last graphics
chip in use was able to run shell. It's not there as a preference,
it's a
On Tue, 2011-10-18 at 17:34 +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
Iirc the fallback mode is using new gtk and stuff... why is it
obsolete?
Is this another provocative question?
It's a fallback that *by definition* uses older technologies to have
something usable on hardware that do not support
AFAIK the goal was to only maintain it until the very last graphics
chip in use was able to run shell. It's not there as a preference,
it's a fallback mode for unsupported hardware.
Absolutely! My question was exactly about that - is there theoretical
possibility that proper survey would amend
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 05:15:37PM +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
Provocative question: is there any way that some unbiased survey would
change the emphasis of development from gnome-shell to the fallback mode?
And increase the configurability and so on.. Or - the current strategy is
Phoronix is a tabloid seeking sensation.
Agree. But I guess it is not a surprise that some users are crying for good
old gnome2. If gnome could properly estimate the share of those deprived...
would it change anything?
What's stopping these deprived users from using Gnome 2.X? I don't
for too long. Usage seems to be minimal. But not a lot of distributions
have GNOME 3 yet, so it is also a bit early to tell.
Exactly. Let's wait till all distros outphase gnome 2.x
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
What's stopping these deprived users from using Gnome 2.X? I don't think
there's enough developers interested in keeping the 2.X series alive - it
would be a different matter if people were smashing out the features/patches
for the 2.X range but as that's not happening I don't see why they
2011/10/18 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl
At the moment, it seems almost noone is using fallback mode. As such, I
don't think the current efforts made into fallback more will continue
for too long. Usage seems to be minimal. But not a lot of distributions
have GNOME 3 yet, so it is also a bit
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 08:20:18PM +0200, Rovanion Luckey wrote:
2011/10/18 Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl
At the moment, it seems almost noone is using fallback mode. As such, I
don't think the current efforts made into fallback more will continue
for too long. Usage seems to be minimal.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Patryk Zawadzki pat...@pld-linux.orgwrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 6:34 PM, Sergey Udaltsov
sergey.udalt...@gmail.com wrote:
Iirc the fallback mode is using new gtk and stuff... why is it obsolete?
AFAIK the goal was to only maintain it until the very last
AFAIK the goal was to only maintain it until the very last graphics
chip in use was able to run shell. It's not there as a preference,
it's a fallback mode for unsupported hardware.
Plenty of people see it as a preference, but right now on the hardware
side there are plenty of chipsets without
I really want to drop in here.
I on purposely say gnome instead of you to avoid giving the impression
that i attack anyone.
Mark, I am afraid that still looks like an attack... While in general I
agree with you, I guess the format of your message is not appropriate. It
does not make sense to
Phoronix and any linux news orientated site would be _perfect_ for a
Gnome survey! If gnome thinks otherwise then keep on living in that
little perfect utopia world of gnome. Reality is way different. Gnome
really seems to be living in some ideal small everyone loves gnome
world where they
On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 01:09 +0200, Mark wrote:
I really want to drop in here.
I on purposely say gnome instead of you to avoid giving the
impression that i attack anyone.
Honestly, given your hostile tone, it instead comes off as if
you're attacking everybody. I'm going to try to assume you're
On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 00:26 +0100, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
What I initially asked - and still did not get the answer - what could
be the format of the feedback that could change the policies. Perhaps
reverting some of them. What kind of critical feedback would not be
treated as useless?
I
On 18/10/2011 18:15, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
What's stopping these deprived users from using Gnome 2.X? I don't think
there's enough developers interested in keeping the 2.X series alive - it
would be a different matter if people were smashing out the features/patches
for the 2.X range but as
Hi,
Since I have been effectively banned from desktop devel (my posts take
two weeks to be moderated), I am sending this mail personally to
people that have been active in the development.
Michael Larabel has offered to host the survey in the Phoronix site,
so I have been able to bring back many
On 09/19/2011 07:38 PM, Felipe Contreras wrote:
Hi,
Since I have been effectively banned from desktop devel (my posts take
two weeks to be moderated), I am sending this mail personally to
people that have been active in the development.
Michael Larabel has offered to host the survey in the
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Ionut Biru io...@archlinux.ro wrote:
I didn't participate to this discussion before but i think the survey is
pointless now because GNOME 3 wasn't presented to users at all.
From the top 10 mainstream distributions, conform distrowatch, only 2 of
them have
On 19 September 2011 17:08, Felipe Contreras felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Ionut Biru io...@archlinux.ro wrote:
I didn't participate to this discussion before but i think the survey is
pointless now because GNOME 3 wasn't presented to users at all.
From
On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Felipe Contreras
felipe.contre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Ionut Biru io...@archlinux.ro wrote:
[snip]
In my opinion this survey should be published after gnome 3.2 is presented
to a larger audience, now that ubuntu 11.10 is going to
There's been a lot of work done to improve GNOME 3 over the last 6
months. A lot of the complaints of GNOME 3.0 have been already
addressed. Why not just do it after (even more!) distros ship GNOME
3.2?
The first one is probably going to shed more light on what should be
asked than anything
35 matches
Mail list logo
