I generally agree with what you said, so I won't reply to every thing.
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 15:44 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Emmanuele Bassi
> wrote:
> by the way, this whole thread is pretty angry and
> confrontational - or,
>
Hi!
Am Dienstag, den 28.12.2010, 15:44 -0800 schrieb Sriram Ramkrishna:
> I have the perception that information on what all is going on is
> getting lost in the noise. What is the canonical point where
> information on this stuff need to flow to? Seems to me you need to
> pick someone or maybe
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> by the way, this whole thread is pretty angry and confrontational - or,
> at least, it feels a lot that way.
>
It has. I think though as a project we're not quite managing this as well
as we could. Not enough context for the changes we
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 15:19 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> I don't want to see us alienate large swathes of our 3% desktop market
> share. :-)
I think this is a myth that should be debunked. at least, I strongly
believe that it *will* be debunked as soon as distributions start
shipping GNOME 3
2010/12/28 Sergey Udaltsov
> What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2
> > and there's no one preventing you from doing that.
> So, why bother maintaining gnome2 support mode at all? "go to hell,
> just do not upgrade" is unbeatable argument, I must admit.
>
I think t
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 23:07 +0100, Luca Ferretti wrote:
> Il giorno mar, 28/12/2010 alle 16.50 +, Emmanuele Bassi ha scritto:
> > On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 13:42 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
>
> > > Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward
> >
> > no problem with that.
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 11:07 PM, Luca Ferretti wrote:
>> > Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward
>>
>> no problem with that. you can maintain the old user experience for
>> yourself and never upgrade.
>
> "and snarkyness is never going to get you anything, mmkay? (ci
Il giorno mar, 28/12/2010 alle 16.50 +, Emmanuele Bassi ha scritto:
> On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 13:42 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
> > Sergey, who sometimes prefers to look backwards rather than forward
>
> no problem with that. you can maintain the old user experience for
> yourself and never u
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 10:18:19PM +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
> Also for 2.x? For 3.0 I don't expect anything other than no bonobo, as
> bonobo is deprecated and we're dropping all deprecated stuff. My only
> wonder is regarding gnome-panel + applets being the fallback option.. so
'applets'
offic
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 05:53:35PM +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 17:25:31 +0100 2010:
> > Are you talking about the 3.0 version? I'd expect bonobo to be dropped
> > for a 3.0 panel.
>
> I'm talking about gnome panel from git master, vuntz a
Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 17:25:31 +0100 2010:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 04:54:43PM +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> > Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 15:20:05 +0100 2010:
> > > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > >
On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 13:42 +, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
>
> > As pointed out before the fallback-mode is not a continuation of
> GNOME 2. It was just the easiest way to create a fallback because we
> don't have the resources to create a non-3D shell that could act as a
> fallback. As we have gno
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 04:54:43PM +0100, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 15:20:05 +0100 2010:
> > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > > Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit :
> > >
Excerpts from Olav Vitters's message of mar dic 28 15:20:05 +0100 2010:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> > Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit :
> > > What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2
> > >
Excerpts from Josselin Mouette's message of mar dic 28 15:03:45 +0100 2010:
> Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit :
> > What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2
> > and there's no one preventing you from doing that.
>
> Is the GNOME 3
It seems, there are, in theory, 5 options for fallback/compatibility:
1. Make g-s and mutter scalable down to envs without 3d
2. Provide full compat/fallback mode, with panel and applets
3. Provide restricted fallback mode, only gnome-panel, just enough to do
smth
4. Same as #3, just very basic and
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote:
> Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit :
> > What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2
> > and there's no one preventing you from doing that.
>
> Is the GNOME 3 panel com
Le mardi 28 décembre 2010 à 13:02 +, Rui Tiago Cação Matos a écrit :
> What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2
> and there's no one preventing you from doing that.
Is the GNOME 3 panel compatible with the GNOME 2 applets?
If so, that’s fine. We distributors can k
> As pointed out before the fallback-mode is not a continuation of GNOME 2.
It was just the easiest way to create a fallback because we don't have the
resources to create a non-3D shell that could act as a fallback. As we have
gnome-panel already it was choosen as the fallback mode.
Is it an indic
Hi!
Am Dienstag, den 28.12.2010, 13:09 + schrieb Sergey Udaltsov:
>
> Actually, your advice effectively stops people from upgrading their
> distros, unless the distro choses to support both gnome2 and gnome3 -
> which I'm afraid will not be the case for most of them. To be fair,
> gnome2+3 m
Excerpts from Rui Tiago Cação Matos's message of mar dic 28 14:02:55 +0100 2010:
> On 28 December 2010 12:53, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
> > I think the fact that GNOME kills gnome-applets make GNOME2
> > compatibility mode a bad joke (if not hypocrisy). A good number of
> > people would like to use t
> What you want is not Gnome 3 then. You want to continue using Gnome 2
> and there's no one preventing you from doing that.
So, why bother maintaining gnome2 support mode at all? "go to hell,
just do not upgrade" is unbeatable argument, I must admit.
Actually, your advice effectively stops people
On 28 December 2010 12:53, Sergey Udaltsov wrote:
> I think the fact that GNOME kills gnome-applets make GNOME2
> compatibility mode a bad joke (if not hypocrisy). A good number of
> people would like to use that mode (I run voting some while ago at
> linux.org.ru - can provide url if someone inte
> Don't think there is 3d on ppc.
There is. I have it on Power G5.
I think the fact that GNOME kills gnome-applets make GNOME2
compatibility mode a bad joke (if not hypocrisy). A good number of
people would like to use that mode (I run voting some while ago at
linux.org.ru - can provide url if som
Sandy Armstrong wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 6:46 AM, Alan Cox wrote:
> >> What do you mean by this? Every time I've tested on nvidia hardware
> >> with the proprietary driver, shell performance has been totally
> >> usable. It's not lightning fast, but I don't think any hardware
> >> chang
25 matches
Mail list logo
