Re: Idea for Lucid (and beyond..)
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Pasi Lallinaho o...@knome.fi wrote: J. Anthony Limon wrote: Hi team, On my system I use a mixture of xfce4-taskmanager and htop, I'm not sure if this would be satisfactory on the majority of people's desktops but I am of the opinion that GSM has to go. I was not aware of xfce4-taskmanager. Thanks. I configured CPU Graph panel plugin to use it. Sad that you can't set the plugin's Width to zero, BTW. Agree. There is loads of *decent* video player alternatives. I've never liked Totem. It sounds it is from the stone-age. I'd really like to see something else already in Lucid. Totem mozilla plugin works pretty well. It is easy to set it to full screen mode. Even katsomo.fi works with it, not with firefox, but with midori. Random access seems to be impossible in linux, still :( My personal experience is that PA is only bringing in problems, but if we can get those sorted out, I can live with it. I hear PA can do wonderful things once it works. I have tried PA when I used Ubuntu, and I could not make 2nd analog line out of my sound card work with it. Both line outs have always worked in Xubuntu (since 2006 when I started using it). We probably want to ship Exaile as our default media player for Lucid also, but I want to finger at the really bad quality of media players in general in Karmic. Most of them do not work for me at all (read: they crash constantly or leak into memory). I haven't seen such crashes. Exaile is the first music player by which I find it easy to set up a collection and easy to use generally. But it is so young, there is some unresponsiveness. Alsaplayer is more mature and has nice controls such as arbitrary playback speed between -400% and 400%, but it does not have a proper collection management, AFAIK. As for remote control of such players, Lirc stopped working at all with my remote control device in Karmic due to its kernel. -- http://www.iki.fi/8/ -- xubuntu-devel mailing list xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
Re: Xubuntu team direction
Vincent wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Steve Dodier sidnio...@gmail.com mailto:sidnio...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with Pasi that Xubuntu may benefit from a multiple leaders board. A single leader system too often, in my opinion, gave the impression that it was Cody against the others when Cody was disagreeing on something with the rest of the team, because it's hard to know if its the project lead or the developer who disagrees. Having a more equal system would probably help avoiding such bizarre situations. This being said, I'm willing to take absolutely no responsibilities of any sort. :) I have enough work with my school, so all the free time I put into FOSS will go to Shimmer projects (which yet match quite a few projects used in Xubuntu, so I may not be competely useless :p). This should not restrict me from babbling all over IRC and the mailing list, though. I'd personally love to see Cody, Pasi, Jim and Lionel (and Vincent?) as that leaders council. You guys are the guys who get the work done, and you all have a long experience with Xubuntu. I'd also like to say that new contributors or people who want to contribute should not bother too much about the leadership thing. Everyone is welcome in Xubuntu, and if you have feedback about what you feel held or slowed you down from contributing, or about how to make you feel more welcome in our little community, feel free to tell it. So, I've found time to check my email and found this conversation. Which immediately brings me to my first point: I really don't have enough time to do some really serious stuff, besides not really having any useful skill. I do share the expectation that a council could work well for Xubuntu, provided that its members can really participate. The people mentioned until now have really proven that they are a really valuable part of the project, so I would really love them to join. (And I sometimes wonder what happened to Jozsef as well.) Sorry to hear your time is so limited. I hope you will still contribute to the project as much as you feel like. Has anybody an idea what Joszef is doing right now? Furthermore, I'm excited to see another potential contributor, though I'd like to know J. Anthony Limon's first name ;-) Being a long time Xfce-user, I hope that you'll contribute in the #xubuntu IRC channel and the xubuntu-users mailinglist to help less experienced users. Another area where I think you could be very valuable (without knowing which other skills you might have :) is in documentation, so you might want to have a chat with Jim about that. Which brings me to my second point: could we expand the Documentation team to User support in general? Not sure whether it's really that necessary but it seems appropriate at first sight. Vincent, how limited your time really is? Combining the website and the documentation team wouldn't sound a bad idea either, if you feel like you don't have time to or are unwilling to lead the website team. Please do not think I'm trying to throw you out of your leader role, I was just thinking all the possibilities we have, if you are going to be available less. Best, -- Vincent I think a probably goos way to reorganize the teams/leaders would be: [ 1 ] Technical team TEAM ROLE: No change. LEADER(S): Lionel and/or Cody, depending what would be the most logical solution and on how big role Cody wishes to keep in the project. I don't think it would be bad thing to have to leaders for the technical team either. [ 2 ] Documentation team TEAM ROLE: The doc team would include the current website team. I see no point in having a separate website team, as the website really isn't *that* big issue right now. I also think it would be easier to get new contributors to the documentation team, if they could be lured in with the phrase the documentation team also administrates our website... LEADER(S): Jim and/or Vincent. Two leaders here would also be plausible. [ 3 ] Marketing team TEAM ROLE: Current marketing and artwork teams combined. LEADER(S): Myself. Any objections are welcome. :) [ 4 ] Testing/QA team TEAM ROLE: No change. LEADER(S): Charlie. Again I have to ask; what's the situation with Michael? How closely is he tied to the Xubuntu team? While he could totally keep his Debian Liaison title, would it be better to locate his position in the technical team? Feel free to disagree on everything or anything. Cheers, -- Pasi Lallinaho Xubuntu Marketing Lead Web-designer, graphic artist IRC: knome @ freenode -- xubuntu-devel mailing list xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
Re: Idea for Lucid (and beyond..)
On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Lionel Le Folgoc mrpo...@ubuntu.com wrote: Hi there, (I stripped some parts to reduce the size of the mail ;) On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 03:41:03PM +0200, Pasi Lallinaho wrote: Charlie Kravetz wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 09:05:45 +0100 Steve Dodier sidnio...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] Both Synaptic and gnome-app-install are being replaced by the Software Centre (not sure if it's the exact name). This new app brings a few dependencies but it's likely that removing gnome-app-install and synaptic will make enough room on the CD for it. As long as it doesn't pull mono and gnome* I'm all for giving the new app a try. Maybe we could ask the desktop team what they think will be ready for Lucid in the software centre, and whether they think they'll be able to replace synaptic in this release. There is enough room on the livecd anyway. I think that we *have to* switch to software-center for lucid, because gnome-app-install has already been demoted from main to universe in karmic (which means that Canonical folks don't want to support it anymore, and since they were the only ones touching it…). Let me chime in here: I *did* use gnome-app-install. And it was kind of my fault for not reporting the missing icons - I did see it, and notice it, but didn't really consciously do so. So I didn't report the bug. Has anybody reported it now? Anyway, I also told people to use that, because I found it to be more useful for finding normal programs, and less scary (normal names, icons, descriptions etc.). I do hope the Software Center will include support for showing all packages in a sane way, but I suppose we can only await that. Lionel's argument in favour of removing gnome-app-install is valid, though, but I'm afraid to see what the effects will be of Canonical not really taking Xubuntu into account. As for asking the devs what they think will be ready for Lucid: that's all documented at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SoftwareCenter#Roadmap 2) gnome-system-monitor [snip] For now, I don't think the Xfce components can deliver the same amount of features and, regretfully, quality. I also like htop, but we can't consider it as the main application for system monitoring, as it's CLI and many people fear command line. Gnome system monitor monitors system load, network load, ram and swap usage, and HDD usage. It may be doing too much for one's needs, but when you want to know if some app is using all of your bandwidth, it's cool to can check in the system monitor without having to go in command line. While xftaskmanager may be more appropriate for your needs, gnome-system-monitor is in my opinion better for end users. We have already xfce4-cpugraph-plugin, xfce4-systemload-plugin, xfce4-netload-plugin and xfce4-taskmanager. The fact that gnome devs decided to make a single program (gnome-system-monitor) for that doesn't imply that we should blindly do the same. (Anyway, I've no strong opinion on this, I think htop is the best one. :P) xfce4-taskmanager needs some work to be user-friendly, IMHO. Not a very strong opinion on this either, though I'd keep using GSM I think. Of course, it might just happen that the problems get addressed upstream (for either project - are they even maintained?). 3) Totem [snip] I can name only one player that also uses a decent backend and that is written with a proper GTK+ GUI. It's Parole, and I'm looking forward to it, but considering that it's rather new, we can't expect it to be as integrated in the desktop yet (for instance, does it already manage to find missing codecs for the user?). Whats the point of a player with tons of features like audacity, mplayer or vlc if it crashes miserably when you launch a file or if the GUI is difficult to use because of some particular skin, or very debatable keyboard shortcut choices? I'm all for keeping Totem for the LTS, and testing Parole from the very beginning of Lucid+1's release cycle (ie. before alpha 1, and until beta 1 at least, so we can report bugs to Ali and see what's missing from the Xubuntu point of view). The issue with mplayer, vlc, or any ffmpeg related player, is that they can't be shipped on a live cd (decision of the TB). About the missing codecs, I think any gstreamer-based player will be handled by gnome-codec-install without problem (this is the case for totem currently, so it might work fine for parole as well). This would require someone to make an objective analysis. Meanwhile, I don't really find Totem particularly bothersome, so I would place that low on the priority list of things to do, and also (as said) not something to do for an LTS. [snip] I do NOT want to look for a firefox replacement and the issues it will bring into an LTS release. That belongs in the regular release, perhaps
Re: Xubuntu team direction
On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Pasi Lallinaho o...@knome.fi wrote: Vincent wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Steve Dodier sidnio...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with Pasi that Xubuntu may benefit from a multiple leaders board. A single leader system too often, in my opinion, gave the impression that it was Cody against the others when Cody was disagreeing on something with the rest of the team, because it's hard to know if its the project lead or the developer who disagrees. Having a more equal system would probably help avoiding such bizarre situations. This being said, I'm willing to take absolutely no responsibilities of any sort. :) I have enough work with my school, so all the free time I put into FOSS will go to Shimmer projects (which yet match quite a few projects used in Xubuntu, so I may not be competely useless :p). This should not restrict me from babbling all over IRC and the mailing list, though. I'd personally love to see Cody, Pasi, Jim and Lionel (and Vincent?) as that leaders council. You guys are the guys who get the work done, and you all have a long experience with Xubuntu. I'd also like to say that new contributors or people who want to contribute should not bother too much about the leadership thing. Everyone is welcome in Xubuntu, and if you have feedback about what you feel held or slowed you down from contributing, or about how to make you feel more welcome in our little community, feel free to tell it. So, I've found time to check my email and found this conversation. Which immediately brings me to my first point: I really don't have enough time to do some really serious stuff, besides not really having any useful skill. I do share the expectation that a council could work well for Xubuntu, provided that its members can really participate. The people mentioned until now have really proven that they are a really valuable part of the project, so I would really love them to join. (And I sometimes wonder what happened to Jozsef as well.) Sorry to hear your time is so limited. I hope you will still contribute to the project as much as you feel like. Yeah well, I've been kind of a bad citizen in not really contributing much in the past -well, a long time- anyway ;-) If someone asked to update something on the website now it would've taken three days or so for me to do it... Has anybody an idea what Joszef is doing right now? Furthermore, I'm excited to see another potential contributor, though I'd like to know J. Anthony Limon's first name ;-) Being a long time Xfce-user, I hope that you'll contribute in the #xubuntu IRC channel and the xubuntu-users mailinglist to help less experienced users. Another area where I think you could be very valuable (without knowing which other skills you might have :) is in documentation, so you might want to have a chat with Jim about that. Which brings me to my second point: could we expand the Documentation team to User support in general? Not sure whether it's really that necessary but it seems appropriate at first sight. Vincent, how limited your time really is? When was the last time you saw me on IRC? ;-) Combining the website and the documentation team wouldn't sound a bad idea either, if you feel like you don't have time to or are unwilling to lead the website team. Please do not think I'm trying to throw you out of your leader role, I was just thinking all the possibilities we have, if you are going to be available less. No offense taken, I think it's a good idea. Best, -- Vincent I think a probably goos way to reorganize the teams/leaders would be: [ 1 ] Technical team TEAM ROLE: No change. LEADER(S): Lionel and/or Cody, depending what would be the most logical solution and on how big role Cody wishes to keep in the project. I don't think it would be bad thing to have to leaders for the technical team either. Sounds good. [ 2 ] Documentation team TEAM ROLE: The doc team would include the current website team. I see no point in having a separate website team, as the website really isn't *that* big issue right now. I also think it would be easier to get new contributors to the documentation team, if they could be lured in with the phrase the documentation team also administrates our website... LEADER(S): Jim and/or Vincent. Two leaders here would also be plausible. Jim, if he wants :) [ 3 ] Marketing team TEAM ROLE: Current marketing and artwork teams combined. LEADER(S): Myself. Any objections are welcome. :) None over here :) [ 4 ] Testing/QA team TEAM ROLE: No change. LEADER(S): Charlie. Hell yeah. Again I have to ask; what's the situation with Michael? How closely is he tied to the Xubuntu team? While he could totally keep his Debian Liaison title, would it be better to locate his position in the technical team? I'll leave it for Michael to respond :) Feel free to disagree on everything or anything.
Re: Idea for Lucid (and beyond..)
Vincent wrote: On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Lionel Le Folgoc mrpo...@ubuntu.com mailto:mrpo...@ubuntu.com wrote: Hi there, (I stripped some parts to reduce the size of the mail ;) On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 03:41:03PM +0200, Pasi Lallinaho wrote: Charlie Kravetz wrote: On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 09:05:45 +0100 Steve Dodier sidnio...@gmail.com mailto:sidnio...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] Both Synaptic and gnome-app-install are being replaced by the Software Centre (not sure if it's the exact name). This new app brings a few dependencies but it's likely that removing gnome-app-install and synaptic will make enough room on the CD for it. As long as it doesn't pull mono and gnome* I'm all for giving the new app a try. Maybe we could ask the desktop team what they think will be ready for Lucid in the software centre, and whether they think they'll be able to replace synaptic in this release. There is enough room on the livecd anyway. I think that we *have to* switch to software-center for lucid, because gnome-app-install has already been demoted from main to universe in karmic (which means that Canonical folks don't want to support it anymore, and since they were the only ones touching it…). Let me chime in here: I *did* use gnome-app-install. And it was kind of my fault for not reporting the missing icons - I did see it, and notice it, but didn't really consciously do so. So I didn't report the bug. Has anybody reported it now? Anyway, I also told people to use that, because I found it to be more useful for finding normal programs, and less scary (normal names, icons, descriptions etc.). I do hope the Software Center will include support for showing all packages in a sane way, but I suppose we can only await that. Lionel's argument in favour of removing gnome-app-install is valid, though, but I'm afraid to see what the effects will be of Canonical not really taking Xubuntu into account. As for asking the devs what they think will be ready for Lucid: that's all documented at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SoftwareCenter#Roadmap Unless there is a graphical way to view ALL packages in the repository the same way that Synaptics does, it does *NOT* deprecate Synaptics and should not be considered such. Until it does it is only a deprecation of gnome-app-install.. 2) gnome-system-monitor [snip] For now, I don't think the Xfce components can deliver the same amount of features and, regretfully, quality. I also like htop, but we can't consider it as the main application for system monitoring, as it's CLI and many people fear command line. Gnome system monitor monitors system load, network load, ram and swap usage, and HDD usage. It may be doing too much for one's needs, but when you want to know if some app is using all of your bandwidth, it's cool to can check in the system monitor without having to go in command line. While xftaskmanager may be more appropriate for your needs, gnome-system-monitor is in my opinion better for end users. We have already xfce4-cpugraph-plugin, xfce4-systemload-plugin, xfce4-netload-plugin and xfce4-taskmanager. The fact that gnome devs decided to make a single program (gnome-system-monitor) for that doesn't imply that we should blindly do the same. (Anyway, I've no strong opinion on this, I think htop is the best one. :P) xfce4-taskmanager needs some work to be user-friendly, IMHO. Not a very strong opinion on this either, though I'd keep using GSM I think. Of course, it might just happen that the problems get addressed upstream (for either project - are they even maintained?). As I said in the original message, it is my opinion that GSM is too bloated and consistently has too many performance problems for the nature of the application. - J -- xubuntu-devel mailing list xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
