Re: As for xfce4-mixer
On Tue, June 18, 2013 3:56 am, Jarno Suni wrote: Hi As for automatic muting of tracks you complained about in the ubuntu-studio-devel mailing list, please see https://bugzilla.xfce.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8291 Apparently the fix was not perfect for the original problem. I would blame the hardware implementation. I thought the intel HDA was pretty standard, but having one mute affect three controls, but only unmute one is already a problem. Pulse deals with it correctly, remembering which channels have to be unmuted (normally two out of the three). However, we are looking for a mixer to use alongside jack when pulse has no control of the device. -- Len Ovens www.OvenWerks.net -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: About qamix
On Tue, June 18, 2013 3:21 am, Jarno Suni wrote: Hi I read in ubuntu-studio-devel archive that you wrote about qamix. I used qamix when it was still available in ubuntu universe repository. If there is a debian src package (even old) it may be helpful to me. Thank you for mentioning that it has been in Ubuntu repos. All I could find was the sourceforge download. It is very high quality, much better than xfce4-mixer, for example. I guess it is not developed currently, http://alsamodular.sourceforge.net/ It just worked! With the advent of pulse for desktop audio, the author may have felt it was no longer useful. Pulse also uses audio interface profiles and is very complete. I will see if I can revive qamix and maybe expand it. -- Len Ovens www.OvenWerks.net -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: About qamix
On Tue, June 18, 2013 7:48 am, Jarno Suni wrote: On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 06:23:50 -0700 Len Ovens l...@ovenwerks.net wrote: If there is a debian src package (even old) it may be helpful to me. Thank you for mentioning that it has been in Ubuntu repos. All I could find was the sourceforge download. Lucid Server is still supported; maybe that package is still available: http://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=qamixsearchon=namessuite=allsection=all I downloaded the package. I had thought it was qt3, but the ubuntu package src I downloaded is only qt3 because it uses qt 1/2 compatibility libs. With the advent of pulse for desktop audio, the author may have felt it was no longer useful. Pulse also uses audio interface profiles and is very complete. Some people prefer not to have PulseAudio on their audio workstation, if they do not need it. I was not suggesting Pulse would replace a good alsa mixer at all. However, in the desktop world, it has taken over. So a lot of alsa mixers are falling into disrepair or at least are no longer being improved. In the audio workstation world a good alsa mixer is a must, but we will only find one if someone interested in professional audio develops it. I think in the past most alsa mixers were developed by people interested in bringing desktop audio to linux. -- Len Ovens www.OvenWerks.net -- Len Ovens www.OvenWerks.net -- Ubuntu-Studio-devel mailing list Ubuntu-Studio-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-studio-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
Hey Jono, I just want to chime in with my impressions from various discussions and talks to clarify the emotional situation. FWIW, I do not have any opinion about which technology is better -- I know nothing about this stuff, just summarizing what I hear/read. Jono Bacon [2013-06-17 16:47 -0700]: My primary point was in response to Canonical declines to work with the rest of the free software community; I think this is an example of us being very eager and open to engage with upstream. I think we are doing the best we can, but entirely understand if upstream are uninterested in investing their time in Mir. It seems the main gripe of GNOME, KDE, and Wayland itself are that there was no such sign of that before the Mir decision -- there have been no discussions at all with the Wayland developers about what we would need from it and how to adapt the Wayland protocol to Unity's needs. Now, I do understand that the Wayland protocol has certainly been looked at, but (1) what has been published from that decision making process has not been technically very convincing to these communities, and (2) it would have been more effective/polite to discuss the technical difficulties as a first step; people like Daniel Stone have a vast technical experience and are not hard to reach (he had even worked for Canonical for several years). So I guess we need to accept that they are not entirely happy about this result and thus won't be eager to drop all their plans and work to jump on Mir. I think the best way for us to contiue to engage with upstreams at this point is to make sure that the Wayland protocol can work on Ubuntu. I don't see support for multiple protocols happening in GNOME/KDE/others, as that's quite contrary to every project's goal (including Unity!) Thanks, Martin -- Martin Pitt| http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org) -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 6:52 AM, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@canonical.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote: On Monday, June 17, 2013 09:52:49 PM Oliver Ries wrote: On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.comwrote: Part of the problem is that no one outside Canonical know enough to really have an informed opinion. Here are some immediate questions that come to mind: - How invasive would Mir integration be? Is it isolated enough that it could be integrated upstream based on our testing? It depends on how KWin plans to support non-X display servers. Options that I know of are: a) KWin implements a Wayland display server component from scratch (a lot of work) b) KWin is a plugin to Weston c) KWin uses an existing Wayland display server library (none exist that I know of) In case a) you would need to implement a Mir backend as well as a Wayland backend In case b) you would need a libmirserver backend in Weston In case c) you would have to modify the library or it would need to allow backends to be added I took a look at the existing Wayland integration for KWin, cloning with: git clone git://anongit.kde.org/kde-workspace From what I could see in the source code, KWin's backend architecture with respect to rendering boils down to the class SceneOpenGL (kwin/scene_opengl.h) which leverages an implementation of OpenGLBackend. OpenGLBackend abstracts away GL context creation and access to it, and I can see implementations for GLX and EGL(Wayland) in the source. To add Mir (note: not XMir) support (in terms of rendering), another implementation of OpenGLBackend would need to be created that connects to Mir and bootstraps the EGL/GL setup. For Unity8, which is built on top of Qt5, we are doing something very similar, although we are leveraging Qt's platform abstraction layer quite heavily for abstracting EGL/GL-specific bits'n'pieces (see https://code.launchpad.net/qtubuntu). From what I can see in the source code, the current Wayland-backend creates a fullscreen surface for the session compositor (potentially talking to the system compositor). Mir supports this, too, and we are relying on this kind of functionality for XMir. Is this correct? Or am I missing something? One thing that I was not able to find is how kwin integrates with other aspects of the underlying platform/underlying compositor, e.g.: * Input handling/filtering with the shell/kwin/kde having the first right to reject * Application mgmt for being able to define focus strategies, window placement strategies etc. * Output mgmt for handling multi-monitor configurations and transitions between multi-monitor setups It would be great if someone could give me some direction which code to look at for these components. I would expect that some sort of abstraction layer exists that allows kwin/kde to interface with aforementioned components as X and Wayland are sufficiently different to justify such an interface. In any case: Mir exposes these components in terms of source-code interfaces up the stack, and Mir avoids defining a privileged protocol for those classes of functionality. Unity 8 consumes Mir by defining an abstraction layer as in: Unity8 - Unity8/Mir-Bridge - Mir, and uses either Mir to implement the abstraction layer or injects mocks to ease testing of components like window placement strategies, focus strategies, input filter chains etc.. Hope this is useful, Thomas - What's the time line? When , if we follow along with Ubuntu, would we expect to run with XMir instead of X and when would we expect to integrate with MIR natively? We're aiming to be able to preview XMir in 13.10. We're doing the work right now to integrate Unity 7 with XMir. - When will MIR have a stable API/ABI? The plan is for libmirserver to have a stable API/ABI by the time we release Unity 8 (again, around the 13.10 timeframe). We are stabilising libmirclient at the moment since it has more consumers than the server API. Though we would expect more functionality to be added to both APIs post 13.10. -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On 18 June 2013 07:33, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote: - What's the time line? When , if we follow along with Ubuntu, would we expect to run with XMir instead of X and when would we expect to integrate with MIR natively? Based solely on comments from this thread, as far as I understand, both Ubuntu and KDE will maintain the ability to work with X for the foreseeable timeframe, so this more of a question on which happens first - Ubuntu stopping support for X based desktop environments (unlikely to be very soon, given the popularity of XFCE and friends) or KWin dropping X support in favour of Wayland-only solution (also unlikely to be quite soon given how many distros are not shipping Wayland by default yet). There might theoretically be new features that work on Mir (or Wayland), but not on X, but those are likely to be minor and more related to boot and/or user switching rather than actual work. -- Best regards, Aigars Mahinovsmailto:aigar...@debian.org #--# | .''`.Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org)| | : :' : Latvian Open Source Assoc. (http://www.laka.lv) | | `. `'Linux Administration and Free Software Consulting | | `- (http://www.aiteki.com) | #--# -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
Hi! 2013/6/18 Steve Langasek steve.langa...@ubuntu.com: On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:13:33PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: I think Jonathon's post earlier today captures the core issue: On Monday, June 17, 2013 09:05:08 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote: [...] As long as Canonical declines to work with the rest of the free software community, Well, I think that's an altogether inaccurate and unfair characterization. Canonical has always been open to working with the rest of the free software community; what Canonical has not been willing to do is blindly follow where certain self-appointed upstreams would lead, when that conflicts with the business's goals. Well, working with the upstreams (who usually know their code best), making compromises, trying to convince upstreams that the way you think something should be designed is best and finally, if there is a consensus, implement that code and make it available to everyone is basically the essence of working with the rest of the free software community. It has never been easy, and if upstreams reject certain features, people are free to fork. But the dicussion needs to happen first and stuff needs to be implemented closely to upstream, so everyone knows about it and it can be accepted easily. Especially the communication step was missing in the Wayland story. Just my 2ct. [...] Cheers, Matthias -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:28:49 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: I don't think there's anyone in the Kubuntu team with the skills to pick up on maintenance of the non-Mir display server stack [...] I think it is much easier to maintain Wayland stack in Ubuntu than port all DEs we support to Mir. As I can see from this thread, the “common” components used by flavors that will be patched to support Mir are Mesa, Upstart and LightDM. In Mesa, it will be just an addition of a new backend — that shouldn’t break anything. Speaking about Upstart, it should be able to start Wayland, Mir or X11 based on the system configuration — this is probably going to be implemented anyway to support two versions of Unity in Saucy. For LightDM, it will be more difficult to support running under different display servers, but given that KDE and GNOME have their own DMs, it shouldn’t be a problem. -- Dmitry Shachnev -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 01:34 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: 2013/6/18 Jono Bacon j...@ubuntu.com: I fully understand if you don't want to work on this problem, and I also fully understand if the KWin maintainer is uninterested in solving this problem and would prefer to focus on Wayland, but we are doing our best to be as open and collaborative as possible here, given the original points raised in Jonathan's email. I see this as a trade-off. Fair point. But you can not expect KDE or GNOME to suddenly jump on the Mir train. Supporting a new display server is pretty damn hard, it took a lot of time to clean up all the code to abstract X dependencies and make the switch to a non-X displayserver possible. But after that is done, maintaining a new display server backend is still not easy. it is funny that everyone seems to assume here that anyone expects upstream to do the work. all that happened in this thread was an offer for conversation with upstream to define the requirements, nothing more ... weather an Ubuntu community person or team or an external team (imagine mint would want to ship with a Mir enabled KDE as an interesting experiment or some such) might ever want to write any code is not relevant for what was discussed in the thread. all there was, was an offer/request for communication to have the Mir upstreams get an idea about the requirements which could then be put on a Wiki page so potential porters would have something to work along... i find it a pretty poor picture that a desktop flavour team is not even willing to answer/ask questions and invest the 15-30 min such a call might take ... all i see in this thread is canonical giving offers and complete refusal from the other side with pointers to some totally unfounded claims about potential bugs unity might have caused in mesa in the past ... as a member of this community that goes into his 9th year with Ubuntu and who who knows most of the participants in person, i must say I'm extremely shocked and disappointed by the attitude coming from the community people i used to admire so much and that i usually know as pretty rational people ... ciao oli signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 11:16 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: Hi! 2013/6/18 Steve Langasek steve.langa...@ubuntu.com: On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:13:33PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: I think Jonathon's post earlier today captures the core issue: On Monday, June 17, 2013 09:05:08 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote: [...] As long as Canonical declines to work with the rest of the free software community, Well, I think that's an altogether inaccurate and unfair characterization. Canonical has always been open to working with the rest of the free software community; what Canonical has not been willing to do is blindly follow where certain self-appointed upstreams would lead, when that conflicts with the business's goals. Well, working with the upstreams (who usually know their code best), making compromises, trying to convince upstreams that the way you think something should be designed is best and finally, if there is a consensus, implement that code and make it available to everyone is basically the essence of working with the rest of the free software community. It has never been easy, and if upstreams reject certain features, people are free to fork. But the dicussion needs to happen first and stuff needs to be implemented closely to upstream, so everyone knows about it and it can be accepted easily. Especially the communication step was missing in the Wayland story. so the right reaction is to now reject the communication from the upstream/flavour side as a punishment for this ?!? ciao oli signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 09:00:26 AM Aigars Mahinovs wrote: On 18 June 2013 07:33, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote: - What's the time line? When , if we follow along with Ubuntu, would we expect to run with XMir instead of X and when would we expect to integrate with MIR natively? Based solely on comments from this thread, as far as I understand, both Ubuntu and KDE will maintain the ability to work with X for the foreseeable timeframe, so this more of a question on which happens first - Ubuntu stopping support for X based desktop environments (unlikely to be very soon, given the popularity of XFCE and friends) or KWin dropping X support in favour of Wayland-only solution (also unlikely to be quite soon given how many distros are not shipping Wayland by default yet). There might theoretically be new features that work on Mir (or Wayland), but not on X, but those are likely to be minor and more related to boot and/or user switching rather than actual work. We covered this already. That's true, but it's also rather more likely that at some point the X stack will atrophy to the point that it will be buggy and not so reliable (I know that the several engineers Canonical have had working on X related issues are doing actual stuff, so it's safe to assume that if they are focused elsewhere, it will have an actual effect) and so eventually, the fact that X still exists in Ubuntu is unlikely to be a sufficient condition. As I've said before, I have no idea how long eventually is. Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:40:34 AM Oliver Grawert wrote: hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 01:34 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: 2013/6/18 Jono Bacon j...@ubuntu.com: I fully understand if you don't want to work on this problem, and I also fully understand if the KWin maintainer is uninterested in solving this problem and would prefer to focus on Wayland, but we are doing our best to be as open and collaborative as possible here, given the original points raised in Jonathan's email. I see this as a trade-off. Fair point. But you can not expect KDE or GNOME to suddenly jump on the Mir train. Supporting a new display server is pretty damn hard, it took a lot of time to clean up all the code to abstract X dependencies and make the switch to a non-X displayserver possible. But after that is done, maintaining a new display server backend is still not easy. it is funny that everyone seems to assume here that anyone expects upstream to do the work. all that happened in this thread was an offer for conversation with upstream to define the requirements, nothing more ... weather an Ubuntu community person or team or an external team (imagine mint would want to ship with a Mir enabled KDE as an interesting experiment or some such) might ever want to write any code is not relevant for what was discussed in the thread. all there was, was an offer/request for communication to have the Mir upstreams get an idea about the requirements which could then be put on a Wiki page so potential porters would have something to work along... i find it a pretty poor picture that a desktop flavour team is not even willing to answer/ask questions and invest the 15-30 min such a call might take ... all i see in this thread is canonical giving offers and complete refusal from the other side with pointers to some totally unfounded claims about potential bugs unity might have caused in mesa in the past ... as a member of this community that goes into his 9th year with Ubuntu and who who knows most of the participants in person, i must say I'm extremely shocked and disappointed by the attitude coming from the community people i used to admire so much and that i usually know as pretty rational people ... Generally when I find myself at odds with a number of people who I generally consider pretty rationale people it causes me to go back and reconsider if maybe I've missed something in formulating my perspective on an issue. Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 06:08 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 09:00:26 AM Aigars Mahinovs wrote: On 18 June 2013 07:33, Scott Kitterman ubu...@kitterman.com wrote: - What's the time line? When , if we follow along with Ubuntu, would we expect to run with XMir instead of X and when would we expect to integrate with MIR natively? Based solely on comments from this thread, as far as I understand, both Ubuntu and KDE will maintain the ability to work with X for the foreseeable timeframe, so this more of a question on which happens first - Ubuntu stopping support for X based desktop environments (unlikely to be very soon, given the popularity of XFCE and friends) or KWin dropping X support in favour of Wayland-only solution (also unlikely to be quite soon given how many distros are not shipping Wayland by default yet). There might theoretically be new features that work on Mir (or Wayland), but not on X, but those are likely to be minor and more related to boot and/or user switching rather than actual work. We covered this already. That's true, but it's also rather more likely that at some point the X stack will atrophy to the point that it will be buggy and not so reliable (I know that the several engineers Canonical have had working on X related issues are doing actual stuff, so it's safe to assume that if they are focused elsewhere, it will have an actual effect) and so eventually, the fact that X still exists in Ubuntu is unlikely to be a sufficient condition. As I've said before, I have no idea how long eventually is. pretty sure as long as there are X apps being shipped in Ubuntu you will see full support for XMir (i would assume eventually is several years from now) ... ciao oli signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 12:11 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: 2013/6/18 Oliver Grawert o...@ubuntu.com: hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 11:16 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: Hi! 2013/6/18 Steve Langasek steve.langa...@ubuntu.com: On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:13:33PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: I think Jonathon's post earlier today captures the core issue: On Monday, June 17, 2013 09:05:08 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote: [...] As long as Canonical declines to work with the rest of the free software community, Well, I think that's an altogether inaccurate and unfair characterization. Canonical has always been open to working with the rest of the free software community; what Canonical has not been willing to do is blindly follow where certain self-appointed upstreams would lead, when that conflicts with the business's goals. Well, working with the upstreams (who usually know their code best), making compromises, trying to convince upstreams that the way you think something should be designed is best and finally, if there is a consensus, implement that code and make it available to everyone is basically the essence of working with the rest of the free software community. It has never been easy, and if upstreams reject certain features, people are free to fork. But the dicussion needs to happen first and stuff needs to be implemented closely to upstream, so everyone knows about it and it can be accepted easily. Especially the communication step was missing in the Wayland story. so the right reaction is to now reject the communication from the upstream/flavour side as a punishment for this ?!? There is no communication at the moment - mentioning stuff on a Mailinglist, which upstream developers most likely won't read (you cannot be subscribed to every distribution's ML) does not help. Contacting the upstreams directly on their mailinglists (the KWin ML or the GNOME Mutter ML) is the step to do. well, this thread is called non-Unity *flavours* and Mir involving upstreams would be a secondary step ... My comment was about the communication with Wayland . Speaking to Wayland developers doesn't make sense anymore, since Ubuntu is doing Mir now. i personally don't care at all about Wayland or Mir and trust the specialists in their area to make the right decisions (as i know they will trust me for my areas) ... what bothers me in this thread is the attitude more than the topic, there is an offer for communication and it is declined with a foot stomping i don't talk to you because you didn't talk to me first attitude of ten year olds ... ,, form people i consider friends that i learned to know as pretty rational people and that i thought i would know better ... Although emotion is involved, there are technical reasons for not considering Mir, which Martin has summarized in a Blogpost. to quote one of his reasons: Ubuntu has always had one of the worst graphics stack in the free software world. I can see this in the bug tracker. The quality of the Mesa stack in Ubuntu is really bad. right, thats a truely founded and technically proper researched statement ... sadly his blogpost is full of this ... as a spectator who doesn't really know much or care about display servers (but who cares very much about the online community he lives in) and who tries to get all arguments from both sides to get an objective opinion about the topic i must say that Chris Halse Rogers' Why Mir series of blog posts appears a lot more rational with a lot less FUD spread across it (and surprisingly no foot stomping at all)... ciao oli signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
2013/6/18 Oliver Grawert o...@ubuntu.com: hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 11:16 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: Hi! 2013/6/18 Steve Langasek steve.langa...@ubuntu.com: On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:13:33PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: I think Jonathon's post earlier today captures the core issue: On Monday, June 17, 2013 09:05:08 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote: [...] As long as Canonical declines to work with the rest of the free software community, Well, I think that's an altogether inaccurate and unfair characterization. Canonical has always been open to working with the rest of the free software community; what Canonical has not been willing to do is blindly follow where certain self-appointed upstreams would lead, when that conflicts with the business's goals. Well, working with the upstreams (who usually know their code best), making compromises, trying to convince upstreams that the way you think something should be designed is best and finally, if there is a consensus, implement that code and make it available to everyone is basically the essence of working with the rest of the free software community. It has never been easy, and if upstreams reject certain features, people are free to fork. But the dicussion needs to happen first and stuff needs to be implemented closely to upstream, so everyone knows about it and it can be accepted easily. Especially the communication step was missing in the Wayland story. so the right reaction is to now reject the communication from the upstream/flavour side as a punishment for this ?!? There is no communication at the moment - mentioning stuff on a Mailinglist, which upstream developers most likely won't read (you cannot be subscribed to every distribution's ML) does not help. Contacting the upstreams directly on their mailinglists (the KWin ML or the GNOME Mutter ML) is the step to do. My comment was about the communication with Wayland. Speaking to Wayland developers doesn't make sense anymore, since Ubuntu is doing Mir now. Although emotion is involved, there are technical reasons for not considering Mir, which Martin has summarized in a Blogpost. There is no hostility against Canonical. Ubuntu is important, and you can assume that people want to support it, if the tradeoffs aren't too high. Regards, Matthias -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
Oliver Grawert o...@ubuntu.com wrote: hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 06:13 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:40:34 AM Oliver Grawert wrote: as a member of this community that goes into his 9th year with Ubuntu and who who knows most of the participants in person, i must say I'm extremely shocked and disappointed by the attitude coming from the community people i used to admire so much and that i usually know as pretty rational people ... Generally when I find myself at odds with a number of people who I generally consider pretty rationale people it causes me to go back and reconsider if maybe I've missed something in formulating my perspective on an issue. well someone reached out a hand and said can you help me understand what i might have missed in formulating, we can have a call or another form of forum ... the answer was no i don't have any interest in talking to you ... And yet this thread continues. Perhaps you're being a bit over dramatic yourself. Talking is still going on, so pretty clearly your characterization isn't completely accurate. It would probably be a lot easier to work out issues like this face to face in hallway conversation or over a beer. Unfortunately, such meetings these days are Canonical only. Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On 06/18/2013 08:04 AM, Scott Kitterman wrote: Oliver Grawert o...@ubuntu.com wrote: hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 06:13 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 11:40:34 AM Oliver Grawert wrote: as a member of this community that goes into his 9th year with Ubuntu and who who knows most of the participants in person, i must say I'm extremely shocked and disappointed by the attitude coming from the community people i used to admire so much and that i usually know as pretty rational people ... Generally when I find myself at odds with a number of people who I generally consider pretty rationale people it causes me to go back and reconsider if maybe I've missed something in formulating my perspective on an issue. well someone reached out a hand and said can you help me understand what i might have missed in formulating, we can have a call or another form of forum ... the answer was no i don't have any interest in talking to you ... And yet this thread continues. Perhaps you're being a bit over dramatic yourself. Talking is still going on, so pretty clearly your characterization isn't completely accurate. It would probably be a lot easier to work out issues like this face to face in hallway conversation or over a beer. Unfortunately, such meetings these days are Canonical only. Scott K There is no reason the same conversation can't happen over a video chat (beers still optional, of course). This is how the vast majority of Canonical conversations happens these days too. I haven't been in the same city as any of my team members since UDS in Copenhagen, so please don't feel like the community is being left out. Michael Hall mhall...@ubuntu.com -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On 18 June 2013 02:00, Aigars Mahinovs aigar...@gmail.com wrote: Based solely on comments from this thread, as far as I understand, both Ubuntu and KDE will maintain the ability to work with X for the foreseeable timeframe, so this more of a question on which happens first - Ubuntu stopping support for X based desktop environments (unlikely to be very soon, given the popularity of XFCE and friends) or KWin dropping X support in favour of Wayland-only solution (also unlikely to be quite soon given how many distros are not shipping Wayland by default yet). There might theoretically be new features that work on Mir (or Wayland), but not on X, but those are likely to be minor and more related to boot and/or user switching rather than actual work. I think you're mixing up two different concepts: support for running X apps and support for running X as the system display server. As I mentioned before, my guess is that GNOME will only work with Wayland as system display server within a year or two. Similarly, I expect Unity to only work with Mir as the system display server for either 14.04 LTS or 14.10. Developers are not switching to Mir or Wayland for theoretical minor features, but to finally move past long-standing issues with the X stack that impact users. Obviously everyone will still support running legacy X apps for at least the next few years. Jeremy -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 01:38:09PM +0400, Dmitry Shachnev wrote: On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 00:28:49 -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: I don't think there's anyone in the Kubuntu team with the skills to pick up on maintenance of the non-Mir display server stack [...] I think it is much easier to maintain Wayland stack in Ubuntu than port all DEs we support to Mir. As I can see from this thread, the “common” components used by flavors that will be patched to support Mir are Mesa, Upstart and LightDM. Not sure where this came from, but there are no patches to upstart needed to support Mir. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:45:18 PM Oliver Grawert wrote: hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 12:11 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: 2013/6/18 Oliver Grawert o...@ubuntu.com: hi, On Di, 2013-06-18 at 11:16 +0200, Matthias Klumpp wrote: Hi! 2013/6/18 Steve Langasek steve.langa...@ubuntu.com: On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 05:13:33PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote: I think Jonathon's post earlier today captures the core issue: On Monday, June 17, 2013 09:05:08 PM Jonathan Riddell wrote: [...] As long as Canonical declines to work with the rest of the free software community, Well, I think that's an altogether inaccurate and unfair characterization. Canonical has always been open to working with the rest of the free software community; what Canonical has not been willing to do is blindly follow where certain self-appointed upstreams would lead, when that conflicts with the business's goals. Well, working with the upstreams (who usually know their code best), making compromises, trying to convince upstreams that the way you think something should be designed is best and finally, if there is a consensus, implement that code and make it available to everyone is basically the essence of working with the rest of the free software community. It has never been easy, and if upstreams reject certain features, people are free to fork. But the dicussion needs to happen first and stuff needs to be implemented closely to upstream, so everyone knows about it and it can be accepted easily. Especially the communication step was missing in the Wayland story. so the right reaction is to now reject the communication from the upstream/flavour side as a punishment for this ?!? There is no communication at the moment - mentioning stuff on a Mailinglist, which upstream developers most likely won't read (you cannot be subscribed to every distribution's ML) does not help. Contacting the upstreams directly on their mailinglists (the KWin ML or the GNOME Mutter ML) is the step to do. well, this thread is called non-Unity *flavours* and Mir involving upstreams would be a secondary step ... My comment was about the communication with Wayland . Speaking to Wayland developers doesn't make sense anymore, since Ubuntu is doing Mir now. i personally don't care at all about Wayland or Mir and trust the specialists in their area to make the right decisions (as i know they will trust me for my areas) ... what bothers me in this thread is the attitude more than the topic, there is an offer for communication and it is declined with a foot stomping i don't talk to you because you didn't talk to me first attitude of ten year olds ... ,, form people i consider friends that i learned to know as pretty rational people and that i thought i would know better ... Although emotion is involved, there are technical reasons for not considering Mir, which Martin has summarized in a Blogpost. to quote one of his reasons: Ubuntu has always had one of the worst graphics stack in the free software world. I can see this in the bug tracker. The quality of the Mesa stack in Ubuntu is really bad. right, thats a truely founded and technically proper researched statement ... sadly his blogpost is full of this ... as a spectator who doesn't really know much or care about display servers (but who cares very much about the online community he lives in) and who tries to get all arguments from both sides to get an objective opinion about the topic i must say that Chris Halse Rogers' Why Mir series of blog posts appears a lot more rational with a lot less FUD spread across it (and surprisingly no foot stomping at all)... The same blog post you're quoting selectively from goes into rather more detail about concerns: http://blog.martin-graesslin.com/blog/2013/05/mir-in-kubuntu/ Keep in mind that this is not from someone who isn't fundamentally anti-Ubuntu and or anti- Canonical. He's taken a week of his time to come to UDS (first IDS in Orlando) and try to figure out how to collaborate better. While I appreciate Chris Halse Rogers posts on Why Mir, those are precisely the ones Martin Pitt was referring to when he said: ... Now, I do understand that the Wayland protocol has certainly been looked at, but (1) what has been published from that decision making process has not been technically very convincing to these communities, ... Many people don't think the primary motivation was technical and calling them names for thinking that isn't going to get anyone anywhere. So far, there hasn't been a technical argument that people who understand this way better than I do find compelling. Scott K -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
2013/6/18 Jeremy Bicha jbi...@ubuntu.com: On 18 June 2013 02:00, Aigars Mahinovs aigar...@gmail.com wrote: Based solely on comments from this thread, as far as I understand, both Ubuntu and KDE will maintain the ability to work with X for the foreseeable timeframe, so this more of a question on which happens first - Ubuntu stopping support for X based desktop environments (unlikely to be very soon, given the popularity of XFCE and friends) or KWin dropping X support in favour of Wayland-only solution (also unlikely to be quite soon given how many distros are not shipping Wayland by default yet). There might theoretically be new features that work on Mir (or Wayland), but not on X, but those are likely to be minor and more related to boot and/or user switching rather than actual work. I think you're mixing up two different concepts: support for running X apps and support for running X as the system display server. As I mentioned before, my guess is that GNOME will only work with Wayland as system display server within a year or two. Similarly, I expect Unity to only work with Mir as the system display server for either 14.04 LTS or 14.10. Developers are not switching to Mir or Wayland for theoretical minor features, but to finally move past long-standing issues with the X stack that impact users. Obviously everyone will still support running legacy X apps for at least the next few years. Speaking for Lubuntu, this point is my first concern before even thinking about migration to MIR or Wayland : what will be the support and Canonical support for X in the next releases ? For example, is X will be maintained in 14.04 as a LTS component ? Are other flavors can count on it to build a LTS version for 14.04 ? I can't imagine an LTS for at least Xubuntu (and all Xfce based flavors) and Lubuntu without a LTS support for this critical piece of the OS. Regards, Julien Lavergne -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:45:18PM +0200, Oliver Grawert wrote: what bothers me in this thread is the attitude more than the topic, there is an offer for communication and it is declined with a foot stomping i don't talk to you because you didn't talk to me first attitude of ten year olds ... As it is not clear whom you're talking about, I assume this relates to me, being from GNOME and having contributed to this thread. I don't think your communication style is helpful no matter what someone else might have done. -- Regards, Olav -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: Legacy hardware support in MIR
I think my question could fit in this topic also. How about MIR and switchable graphics like Nvidia optimus? As far as I know nouveau doesn't support discrete graphic chip. On 18 June 2013 01:02, Robert Ancell robert.anc...@canonical.com wrote: Mir uses the free drivers that X does currently and Android drivers. So if you card is currently supported in X (i.e. intel, ati, nouveau) then it will continue to work (if those drivers are continued to be maintained). On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Karl Anliot kanl...@gmail.com wrote: I have to ask because I do not know: will MIR support old abandoned video cards?So If I have an older graphics card that works well now, will the MIR maintainers be supporting that graphics card into the future? cheers, kanliot -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Unity APIs weekly (wk 24)
Hi, short status summary of last week: Scopes - 13.04 scopes finally landed in saucy - Fighting integration issues and bugfixing to get it working on the phone - Started merging app demo scope of the phone and desktop app scope - Prepared scopes infrastructure to be able to run multiple scopes within one process Indicators - Finished sound widgets - Prepared MPs for datetime, session and power indicator HUD - HUD fixes for updated BAMF and GMenu based unity-gtk-module along with other landings (13 branches) - Discussions with Unity team on HUD requirements for their BAMF-like API - Fixed BAMF depends so that we can have one HUD build for both Unity 7 and 8 - Setup upstart-app-launch in Jenkins, queued for review from desktop team Other - All outstanding patches for new notification backend landed - Several updates and fixes for libcolumbus and unity-api Thomas -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: non-Unity flavours and Mir
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 07:08:35PM +0400, Dmitry Shachnev wrote: Thomas said that “In the final setup, Mir will come up early on in the boot process and act as system-level compositor” — I thought that would be managed by Upstart. But if that is wrong, things are even better :) Starting early just means an upstart job / just another daemon. If Upstart manages the start/stop/restart of a daemon it doesn't require patching. For Mir I assume system-level compositor means that there will be 2 parts: 1. System-level compositor 2. Session compositor One who handles the keyboard events and so on. Then another which handles a session (login). This would allow a secure access key (something like CTRL-ALT-DEL in Windows, cannot be caught by another process). I don't know much about Mir though so I am just guessing and assume someone will correct me pretty quickly :P -- Regards, Olav -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
Re: Legacy hardware support in MIR
On 18.06.2013 21:10, Nedas Pekorius wrote: I think my question could fit in this topic also. How about MIR and switchable graphics like Nvidia optimus? Should be easier to support, since the xserver is out of the picture. Proper hybrid support depends on kernel features that are about to land in 3.12 I'm told.. then it's just a matter of providing RandR-support in Mir and the UI/policy for switching to the offload gpu. As far as I know nouveau doesn't support discrete graphic chip. supports just fine, just that there's no way to switch on the fly with xserver, nor is there any power management so nouveau will eat your battery if not disabled from the BIOS or otherwise. -- t -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
first ubuntu saucy test rebuild
The first test rebuild of saucy salamander was started yesterday for the amd64, i386 and armhf architectures. Currently running, finished for main, universe will finish within the next ten days (armhf a bit earlier). Results can be seen at http://people.ubuntuwire.org/~wgrant/rebuild-ftbfs-test/test-rebuild-20130614-saucy.html The archive for the test rebuild is https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+archive/test-rebuild-20130614/ Some common build failures are: - underlinking: symbols used in linked object files, which formerly were resolved by linked libraries. The fix almost always is to add the library (mentioned in the error message) to the link command. - build failures exposed by GCC-4.8. See http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.8/porting_to.html for some guidance. Please help fixing the build failures for the final release. Matthias -- ubuntu-devel-announce mailing list ubuntu-devel-announce@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-announce
Privacy features in Touch (cyanogenmod)?
I wish more software companies developed built-in Privacy features and user-control of app internet connections. The internet is a PUBLIC space and I don't like software companies working to put all my data there--including my local searches--while simultaneously doing nothing to bring enhanced privacy features to the OS. Can the upcoming Ubuntu-Touch incorporate some of the cynaogenmod-like Privacy features into Ubuntu Touch? http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/06/how-cyanogenmods-founder-is-giving-android-users-their-privacy-back/ I'd also like to see the ability of Ubuntu Desktop to be able to control what apps can and cannot connect to the internet etc. Unfortunately all Ubuntu seems to be working on is features that create privacy concerns (like the scopes sending search requests to Canonical servers). Please consider Privacy an important feature in Ubuntu/Ubuntu Touch. Which Mobile-OS I select to use will largely be determined by not just its freedom but also what it offers me in terms of Privacy Control over how my data get on the internet. I want a say in whether an app can connect to the internet and when why it connects to the internet. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Privacy features in Touch (cyanogenmod)?
A first approach could be a one-click TOR connection on networkmanager applet. Should be an interesting project. 2013/6/18 Matt B. mttbrns...@outlook.com I wish more software companies developed built-in Privacy features and user-control of app internet connections. The internet is a PUBLIC space and I don't like software companies working to put all my data there--including my local searches--while simultaneously doing nothing to bring enhanced privacy features to the OS. Can the upcoming Ubuntu-Touch incorporate some of the cynaogenmod-like Privacy features into Ubuntu Touch? http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013/06/how-cyanogenmods-founder-is-giving-android-users-their-privacy-back/ I'd also like to see the ability of Ubuntu Desktop to be able to control what apps can and cannot connect to the internet etc. Unfortunately all Ubuntu seems to be working on is features that create privacy concerns (like the scopes sending search requests to Canonical servers). Please consider Privacy an important feature in Ubuntu/Ubuntu Touch. Which Mobile-OS I select to use will largely be determined by not just its freedom but also what it offers me in terms of Privacy Control over how my data get on the internet. I want a say in whether an app can connect to the internet and when why it connects to the internet. -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss -- [] Alexandre Strube su...@ubuntu.com -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
Re: Privacy features in Touch (cyanogenmod)?
On 18 June 2013 14:34, Alexandre Strube su...@surak.eti.br wrote: A first approach could be a one-click TOR connection on networkmanager applet. Should be an interesting project. This is something different to the original point Matt was making. While the ability to route through Tor is a nice-to-have, if apps are allowed to read and send my personal data (contacts, phone records, specific location) then whether or not this goes through Tor is irrelevant. Yes, applications installed on a computer have access to your data. The thing is, that data isn't centralised into a known location (or provided by a known service) so that it can be accessed as necessary by all applications. Added to this is the code review undertaken in traditional projects; for example I'm reasonably happy that Thunderbird won't send my email off to someone (that I might use Gmail is entirely different, as I have chosen to use them as a provider, though I don't expect them to send my email off to Microsoft). The new application format has to allow for fine-grained privacy controls. It's fine if a dialogue is shown saying like This application is requesting the following permissions. You can deselect any you choose, but be aware the application may not function correctly or as intended, as long as I can make the choice whether the latest version of Irritable Felines has full access to my contacts, SMS, browser history and geodata. Heck, make it an advanced option - I assume there will be developer options for U-Touch as for Android. A mobile OS built from the ground-up as privacy-aware is a huge selling point - and for the moment unique. J -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
