Re: CD1 without a network mirror isn't sufficient to install a full desktop environment
Well, I know there *is* a Git commit to set it to xfce instead of gnome, but I don't know how authoritative or influential it will end up being. I also like the idea of compressing/trimming GNOME. Thanks for the feedback. http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=tasksel/tasksel.git;a=commit;h=2a962cc65cdba010177f27e8824ba10d9a799a08 On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Paul Wise p...@debian.org wrote: On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Ztatik Light wrote: But, even *more* reason to not entirely push GNOME aside for Xfce. ;) That hasn't happened at all, the tech media you have been reading and believing neglected to check their facts: pabs@chianamo ~/tasksel-3.13 $ grep -A3 tasksel/desktop debian/templates Template: tasksel/desktop Type: multiselect Choices: gnome, kde, xfce, lxde Default: gnome Indeed, the release team have been pursuing compressing GNOME better so it will fit. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: CD1 without a network mirror isn't sufficient to install a full desktop environment
Oops, yeah -- I guess I was mistaken. I was using `gnome-common' as the basis, but I guess that's even less appropriate than something, like, say ... `gnome-panel' ... But, even *more* reason to not entirely push GNOME aside for Xfce. ;) On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Jeremy Bicha jbi...@ubuntu.com wrote: On 9 September 2012 23:21, Ztatik Light ztatik.li...@gmail.com wrote: According to popcon, Xfce is more common on Debian than GNOME... And How do you figure that? http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=meta-gnome3 http://qa.debian.org/popcon.php?package=xfce4 Just looking at popcon, GNOME is installed several more times as much as XFCE. Even gnome-shell has more installs than xfce4-panel despite GNOME Shell having not been included in a stable Debian release yet. Jeremy
RE: CD1 without a network mirror isn't sufficient to install a full desktop environment
Just a quick suggestion. As a compromise, instead of enabling Xfce as the universal default in tasksel *entirely* ... How about only enabling Xfce as default for the CD* distribution, and leaving the default as GNOME for all non-CD distributions? (DVD, netinst, ...) That will express true bipartisanism ... instead of explicitly being biased towards one direction or another simply at the whim of (a) certain decision maker(s), especially over a technicality. Yes, you can argue this might incur a split between install bases and, thus, possibly be less easy to support ... But both GNOME and Xfce are officially integrated into Debian, and so should both be considered equally ... GNOME has a longer-standing status, specifically with Debian, and other GNU/Linux distributions at large. It's also an officially-supported GNU project, as well as being more authoritative, in the sense that it's the base of GTK+ which is utilized by Xfce. According to popcon, Xfce is more common on Debian than GNOME... And considering the recent controversy surrounding v3, many have opted for alternatives such as Xfce, MATE, Cinnamon, Unity, or etc... I, personally, feel as if GNOME is sort of going the KDE path as far as becoming somewhat bloated. Xfce's lightweight-focused approach can be appreciable, but modern high-level functionality shouldn't necessarily be compromised by lack-of/restricted resources. Simply the fact that it's an OPTION is terrific. But, from the premise of this entire letter, shouldn't exactly be *forced*. Thus, I reiterate that it might be a good idea to maybe consider the possibility of thinking about the potential for ... Xfce being set to default tasksel in CD* distributions, while GNOME remaining default in others. At *least* as a compromise during a ``transitional'' period, whereupon the eventuality of settling on a single/unified default may come into play yet once again. :D
O: ted -- lightweight .DOC editor
Subject: ITP: ted -- lightweight .DOC editor Package: wnpp Version: 2.22; reported 2012-01-04 Severity: wishlist * Package name : ted Version : 2.22 Upstream Author : Mark de Does m...@mdedoes.xs4all.nl * URL : http://nllgg.nl/Ted/ * License : GPL Description : lightweight .DOC editor This was included in previous versions of Debian, but removed, *I believe*, for the reason that it was thought to be unmaintained... The current version has now switched to using GTK+ and was released five months ago. ( previous version is over seven years ) The only valid .DOC editors in Debian are LibreOffice and AbiWord, which are both somewhat bloated (especially LibreOffice, as it's in Java) ... I believe Ted is a nice lightweight alternative.
