Re: GNOME Shell has been removed from the repositories?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, This was driven by the following issues: - - We're not delivering the GNOME3 applications in Natty, so we moved them to a PPA [1]. This was due to us not having the time to do a good job on both Unity and GNOME3. - - To have GNOME Shell in Natty would have required a number of packages to be updated that may have conflicted with GNOME2, so we decided to put it in the PPA too. We also thought putting it in the PPA would make it easier for people to contribute (as you don't need to be sponsored to upload to it). If GNOME Shell works in the PPA AND all the dependencies do not conflict with GNOME2 then it could be uploaded to Natty Universe, but at the moment this seems unlikely. If it depends on any GNOME3 applications (e.g. GNOME control center) then it will have to remain in the PPA. I think the most likely situation is it will be in Natty+1 and Natty users will be able to use it using the PPA. Note that we need more help keeping the PPA up to date, so anyone who is interested do merge proposals into lp:~gnome3-team/package_name/ubuntu and/or jump onto #ubuntu-desktop! - --Robert [1] https://launchpad.net/~gnome3-team/+archive/gnome3 On 19/02/11 20:51, Bilal Akhtar wrote: Hi Jo-Erland, This was discussed in the below bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/690045 GNOME shell depends on several GNOME 3 libraries, most of which haven't (yet) made their way into Ubuntu. This will be fixed very soon when packages from the Ubuntu GNOME 3 ppa will be uploaded to Natty. After that only we'll re-add GNOME shell into the archive. Bilal Akhtar. On 02/19/2011 07:52 AM, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote: I've noticed that gnome-shell is not provided in the repositories for Natty. It used to be available in universe, from Karmic to Maverick. Why is this no longer the case? I strongly believe that GNOME Shell should be available in the repositories, and preferably in main. There is already too much talk about Ubuntu moving away from GNOME. Removing gnome-shell from the repositories will encourage that misconception. I personally remain somewhat sceptical about both Unity and GNOME Shell, but I loudly applaud the efforts of both projects to innovate and modernize the desktop. I also think both projects show great promise, and I'm really looking forward to see how they progress as they mature and are exposed to a greater audience. And I am a little concerned that by both switching to use Unity by default and removing the main competitor -- GNOME Shell -- from the repositories, it may seem like Ubuntu is using its power as the most popular distro to eliminate competition. You will get Unity for free, it will be installed and used by default. GNOME Shell, on the other hand... You'll need to search the web, try to find a good PPA, add the repository and then install it -- if you're really that interested. I am really hesitant to mention the comparison that automatically springs to my mind: Microsoft killed Netscape by providing Internet Explorer for free and, more importantly, installing it by default. No doubt, it's quite an efficient means of ridding oneself of competition, but it really doesn't seem to be in the spirit of Ubuntu. I don't want to come across as accusing anyone of doing that. But I am concerned that's the way people will interpret it and that it'll help fuel tribalism. I strongly believe that the competition between GNOME Shell and Unity will bring out the best in both of them, but that will require both of them to be exposed to as vast an audience as possible. I'm not saying that GNOME Shell should be promoted or installed by default, only that it should be available from the repositories, at the very least in universe. I think that by promoting it to main, that would send a strong signal that Canonical and Ubuntu are not in conflict with GNOME. Also, if people are able to easily try GNOME Shell, then if people do stick with it, developers of Unity has a much better chance of learning why they do so, which will enable them to improve. The same would be true for GNOME Shell, of course: if people try it and chooses to use Unity instead, then they will have the opportunity to learn. The question, therefore, is is Ubuntu going to enable the community around it to be able to improve?. These are the important things in the free software community, and if Ubuntu can do that, then it will have done something important, that will be appreciated... :) In summary: The current situation makes Unity a symbol of conflict and an excuse for tribalism, which is as ironic as it is sad. The best solution is to promote it to main. Thanks for reading, Jo-Erlend Schinstad -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk1hp+IACgkQGOqhiQ98iC4aZwCg0WiMxf1LN/Xi0hZvhYN4frG+
Re: GNOME Shell has been removed from the repositories?
Hi Jo-Erland, This was discussed in the below bug: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-shell/+bug/690045 GNOME shell depends on several GNOME 3 libraries, most of which haven't (yet) made their way into Ubuntu. This will be fixed very soon when packages from the Ubuntu GNOME 3 ppa will be uploaded to Natty. After that only we'll re-add GNOME shell into the archive. Bilal Akhtar. On 02/19/2011 07:52 AM, Jo-Erlend Schinstad wrote: I've noticed that gnome-shell is not provided in the repositories for Natty. It used to be available in universe, from Karmic to Maverick. Why is this no longer the case? I strongly believe that GNOME Shell should be available in the repositories, and preferably in main. There is already too much talk about Ubuntu moving away from GNOME. Removing gnome-shell from the repositories will encourage that misconception. I personally remain somewhat sceptical about both Unity and GNOME Shell, but I loudly applaud the efforts of both projects to innovate and modernize the desktop. I also think both projects show great promise, and I'm really looking forward to see how they progress as they mature and are exposed to a greater audience. And I am a little concerned that by both switching to use Unity by default and removing the main competitor -- GNOME Shell -- from the repositories, it may seem like Ubuntu is using its power as the most popular distro to eliminate competition. You will get Unity for free, it will be installed and used by default. GNOME Shell, on the other hand... You'll need to search the web, try to find a good PPA, add the repository and then install it -- if you're really that interested. I am really hesitant to mention the comparison that automatically springs to my mind: Microsoft killed Netscape by providing Internet Explorer for free and, more importantly, installing it by default. No doubt, it's quite an efficient means of ridding oneself of competition, but it really doesn't seem to be in the spirit of Ubuntu. I don't want to come across as accusing anyone of doing that. But I am concerned that's the way people will interpret it and that it'll help fuel tribalism. I strongly believe that the competition between GNOME Shell and Unity will bring out the best in both of them, but that will require both of them to be exposed to as vast an audience as possible. I'm not saying that GNOME Shell should be promoted or installed by default, only that it should be available from the repositories, at the very least in universe. I think that by promoting it to main, that would send a strong signal that Canonical and Ubuntu are not in conflict with GNOME. Also, if people are able to easily try GNOME Shell, then if people do stick with it, developers of Unity has a much better chance of learning why they do so, which will enable them to improve. The same would be true for GNOME Shell, of course: if people try it and chooses to use Unity instead, then they will have the opportunity to learn. The question, therefore, is is Ubuntu going to enable the community around it to be able to improve?. These are the important things in the free software community, and if Ubuntu can do that, then it will have done something important, that will be appreciated... :) In summary: The current situation makes Unity a symbol of conflict and an excuse for tribalism, which is as ironic as it is sad. The best solution is to promote it to main. Thanks for reading, Jo-Erlend Schinstad -- Bilal Akhtar - Ubuntu Developer bilalakh...@ubuntu.com IRC nick: cdbs signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature -- ubuntu-desktop mailing list ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
GNOME Shell has been removed from the repositories?
I've noticed that gnome-shell is not provided in the repositories for Natty. It used to be available in universe, from Karmic to Maverick. Why is this no longer the case? I strongly believe that GNOME Shell should be available in the repositories, and preferably in main. There is already too much talk about Ubuntu moving away from GNOME. Removing gnome-shell from the repositories will encourage that misconception. I personally remain somewhat sceptical about both Unity and GNOME Shell, but I loudly applaud the efforts of both projects to innovate and modernize the desktop. I also think both projects show great promise, and I'm really looking forward to see how they progress as they mature and are exposed to a greater audience. And I am a little concerned that by both switching to use Unity by default and removing the main competitor -- GNOME Shell -- from the repositories, it may seem like Ubuntu is using its power as the most popular distro to eliminate competition. You will get Unity for free, it will be installed and used by default. GNOME Shell, on the other hand... You'll need to search the web, try to find a good PPA, add the repository and then install it -- if you're really that interested. I am really hesitant to mention the comparison that automatically springs to my mind: Microsoft killed Netscape by providing Internet Explorer for free and, more importantly, installing it by default. No doubt, it's quite an efficient means of ridding oneself of competition, but it really doesn't seem to be in the spirit of Ubuntu. I don't want to come across as accusing anyone of doing that. But I am concerned that's the way people will interpret it and that it'll help fuel tribalism. I strongly believe that the competition between GNOME Shell and Unity will bring out the best in both of them, but that will require both of them to be exposed to as vast an audience as possible. I'm not saying that GNOME Shell should be promoted or installed by default, only that it should be available from the repositories, at the very least in universe. I think that by promoting it to main, that would send a strong signal that Canonical and Ubuntu are not in conflict with GNOME. Also, if people are able to easily try GNOME Shell, then if people do stick with it, developers of Unity has a much better chance of learning why they do so, which will enable them to improve. The same would be true for GNOME Shell, of course: if people try it and chooses to use Unity instead, then they will have the opportunity to learn. The question, therefore, is is Ubuntu going to enable the community around it to be able to improve?. These are the important things in the free software community, and if Ubuntu can do that, then it will have done something important, that will be appreciated... :) In summary: The current situation makes Unity a symbol of conflict and an excuse for tribalism, which is as ironic as it is sad. The best solution is to promote it to main. Thanks for reading, Jo-Erlend Schinstad -- ubuntu-desktop mailing list ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop
