Matthias Clasen matthias.cla...@gmail.com wrote:
to be fair, I'd envision this as a completely separate session that
you need to install and select, similar to what Ubuntu does —
especially if we want to call it GNOME Classic.
Agreed.
I don't think a separate session will work very well for
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote:
Matthias Clasen matthias.cla...@gmail.com wrote:
to be fair, I'd envision this as a completely separate session that
you need to install and select, similar to what Ubuntu does —
especially if we want to call it GNOME
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:59 PM, Matthias Clasen
matthias.cla...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 4:04 AM, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote:
A separate user session would be the best user experience, IMO.
If you think so, we'll have to discuss the technicalities of making that work.
Florian Müllner fmuell...@gnome.org wrote:
...
The Tweak Tool shouldn't have anything to do with extensions. They are
something that you install and run as a part of the system, not
something to be tweaked via settings.
While I agree with you that gnome-tweak-tool (and package managers
(*))
The idea of using the web page as management was an idea that Owen had, and
in some ways it was a logical progression of the addons.mozilla.org
experience: you get extensions from the web site, so why not
enable/disable/configure/uninstall them from there too?
It's a good idea, but a myriad of
On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Allan Day allanp...@gmail.com wrote:
Florian Müllner fmuell...@gnome.org wrote:
...
The Tweak Tool shouldn't have anything to do with extensions. They are
something that you install and run as a part of the system, not
something to be tweaked via settings.
In the discussion over fallback mode at the Boston, we've talked about
GNOME users who use fallback mode because they are used to certain
elements and features of the GNOME 2 UX, such as task bars,
minimization, etc. GNOME 3 has brought new patterns to replace these,
such as overview and search.
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 08:17 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
So, what to do ? Thankfully, we have a pretty awesome extension
mechanism in gnome-shell (extensions.gnome.org), and there are a ton
of extensions out there which allow users to tweak gnome-shell in all
kinds of ways. This also includes
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 08:17:16AM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
We haven't made a final decision yet on how to let users turn on this
'classic mode' - it may be a switch in gnome-tweak-tool or something
else.
I'm wondering if we cannot just change the fallback mode switch into a
traditional
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 15:05 +0100, Olav Vitters wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 08:17:16AM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
We haven't made a final decision yet on how to let users turn on this
'classic mode' - it may be a switch in gnome-tweak-tool or something
else.
I'm wondering if we
It won't go in the Settings.
Why not? Why was the forced fallback in Settings instead of the Tweak Tool
in the first place?
Cheers,
Debarshi
--
There are two hard problems in computer science: cache invalidation, naming
things and off-by-one errors.
pgpraCqiskS4Y.pgp
Description: PGP
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 14:27 +0100, Andre Klapper wrote:
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 08:17 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
So, what to do ? Thankfully, we have a pretty awesome extension
mechanism in gnome-shell (extensions.gnome.org), and there are a ton
of extensions out there which allow users to
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Debarshi Ray rishi...@lostca.se wrote:
It won't go in the Settings.
Why not? Why was the forced fallback in Settings instead of the Tweak Tool
in the first place?
+1
Cheers,
Debarshi
--
There are two hard problems in computer science: cache
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 14:11 +, Debarshi Ray wrote:
It won't go in the Settings.
Why not? Why was the forced fallback in Settings instead of the Tweak Tool
in the first place?
To work-around driver bugs. We might replace the force fallback
setting with a force software rendering switch
hi;
On 21 November 2012 14:05, Olav Vitters o...@vitters.nl wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 08:17:16AM -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
We haven't made a final decision yet on how to let users turn on this
'classic mode' - it may be a switch in gnome-tweak-tool or something
else.
I'm wondering
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
to be fair, I'd envision this as a completely separate session that
you need to install and select, similar to what Ubuntu does —
especially if we want to call it GNOME Classic.
I don't think a separate session will work
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Matthias Clasen
matthias.cla...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
to be fair, I'd envision this as a completely separate session that
you need to install and select, similar to what Ubuntu does —
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 09:56 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
I don't think a separate session will work very well for this - for
one thing, setting this up will require a number of settings to be
tweaked (e.g. the one for the minimize button), and alternative
sessions don't have the right
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:27 AM, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 08:17 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
So, what to do ? Thankfully, we have a pretty awesome extension
mechanism in gnome-shell (extensions.gnome.org), and there are a ton
of extensions out there which
hi Andre;
On 21 November 2012 13:27, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
Can we make testing beta versions (and porting extensions to the next
major version of GNOME) more attractive / easier for extension authors?
Have Shell maintainers published info on Code changes which may affect
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 8:32 AM, Emmanuele Bassi eba...@gmail.com wrote:
hi Andre;
On 21 November 2012 13:27, Andre Klapper ak...@gmx.net wrote:
Can we make testing beta versions (and porting extensions to the next
major version of GNOME) more attractive / easier for extension authors?
21 matches
Mail list logo
