> * "Root Terminal" --> open a terminal and type "su" :-) (there could
> even be a menu item for this in gnome-terminal itself)
Yeah, this is actually the worst of the lot - it runs gnome-terminal as
root, which is very silly. (I tried to kill it off in Ubuntu, but...)
- Jeff
--
OSCON 2
Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
>
>>That's close but that talks about "Preferences" and "Administration". I'm
>>talking about "System Tools" and "Administration".
Most of the items in "Administration" let you configure things, and some
of them don't. Those that do probably should go in "Preferences" (as
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 14:15 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
> > In these cases, it would be good to be able to find a way to get access
> > without too much trouble like a troubleshooter system that tells you
> > where to go if the default multimedia stuff doesn't work.
>
> I don't want to be
> That's close but that talks about "Preferences" and "Administration". I'm
> talking about "System Tools" and "Administration".
In many ways, they're in it together. One way of getting rid of crapplets is
by integrating them into more useful locations - you could do the same thing
with the flo
> Whose toes would we be stepping on if we pushed this "Friends of GNOME"
> thing?
The FoG "brand" is currently used for the Foundation's end-user focused
fundraising efforts, so we'd have to convince the board that having a non
paying level of FoGness wouldn't detract. If not, we can always com
> I *think* we're asking 'how many users of GNOME are there'
Broadly, yes, but what we've discussed is establishing multiple data sources
(however reliable, having datapoints with caveats is better than nothing) as
well as providing encouragement through momentum.
- Jeff
--
OSCON 2005: August
--- Havoc Pennington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 19:37 +0200, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> > Some may think that it could encourage people to add more capplets, but
> > that's already happening, in the last 2 releases we've added "Multimedia
> > systems selector", "Remote d
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 15:31 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 19:37 +0200, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> > Some may think that it could encourage people to add more capplets, but
> > that's already happening, in the last 2 releases we've added "Multimedia
> > systems selector", "Rem
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 16:48 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
> > "Join Friends of GNOME and celebrate easy to use software for $OS!" (email
> > form)
> >
> > What question are we asking? :-)
>
> I *think* we're asking 'how many users of GNOME are there', not 'how
> many discovered gnome-about in their
Because a thread can never cause enough context switches...
Is anyone planning on draining the swamp[1] around user identity by
patching (say) evo, ephy, etc. to get my identity from the 'about me'
capplet? Has this already been done somewhere that I've missed?
Luis (looking at all his shiny new
Hi,
Looking at the schedule I thought I'd missed the time period left for
new modules, but looking again it appears we still have a small amount
of time. I'd like to propose eggcups for 2.12.
For more information about eggcups, see:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-announce-list/2005-June/m
On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 11:21:23AM -0400 or thereabouts, Robert Love wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 14:37 +1200, John Williams wrote:
>
> > Essentially we propose modifying the GNOME About box to include a toggle
> > that indicate the user's permission to activate a program that would
> > periodic
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 14:15 -0700, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote:
>
> In these cases, it would be good to be able to find a way to get
> access without too much trouble like a troubleshooter system that
> tells you where to go if the default multimedia stuff doesn't work.
I don't want to be too sarcast
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 03:31:58PM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 19:37 +0200, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> > Some may think that it could encourage people to add more capplets, but
> > that's already happening, in the last 2 releases we've added "Multimedia
> > systems selector
That's close but that talks about "Preferences" and "Administration".
I'm talking about "System Tools" and "Administration".
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 06:43 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
>
> > I think that the separation of these two menus is confusing.
>
> http://live.gnome.org/PreferencesRevisited
>
On 7/6/05, Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > > Sure, and that's why basically everything but gnome-about is going to be
> > > doubly icky in some way. If we somehow convince ourselves this is not
> > > appropriate in gnome-about, it's not going to be appropriate anywhere,
> > > and we
> > Sure, and that's why basically everything but gnome-about is going to be
> > doubly icky in some way. If we somehow convince ourselves this is not
> > appropriate in gnome-about, it's not going to be appropriate anywhere,
> > and we should just give up. But that's pissweak. :-)
>
> The user
> I think that the separation of these two menus is confusing.
http://live.gnome.org/PreferencesRevisited
- Jeff
--
GNOME Summit 2005: October 8th-10th http://live.gnome.org/Boston2005
Markets are what you sell bubbly health drinks, fluorescent blow up
furniture
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 04:36 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> > Real users won't understand the difference between GNOME and their Linux
> > distro as a whole. How would they? If you can see the lines between GNOME
> > and everything else, that means the distro/sysadmin did a shitty job of
> > integration
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 19:37 +0200, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> Some may think that it could encourage people to add more capplets, but
> that's already happening, in the last 2 releases we've added "Multimedia
> systems selector", "Remote desktop" and "Removable drives and media", so
> we should at le
I think that the separation of these two menus is confusing.
Currently, the gnome-system-tools items, requiring a root password to
run, are in the System/Administration menu, and other tools, such as
gconf-editor, terminal, root terminal (requiring a root password to
run), File browser, floppy for
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Eric Larson wrote:
> Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 09:54:40 -0400
> From: Eric Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Jeff Waugh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
> Subject: Re: Modifying GNOME-About to count users
>
> > I've been advocating a simple enter-your-email-w
> > Yes, this is basically what the FoG idea at the end of my mail boils
> > down to, and precisely what the gnome-about form could offer. "Love
> > GNOME? Join the Friends of GNOME gang!"
>
> Real users won't understand the difference between GNOME and their Linux
> distro as a whole. How would
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:51 -0700, Rob Adams wrote:
> g-s-t is already part of gnome, right? So presumably including
> additional g-s-t tools is up to the discretion of the g-s-t maintainers?
When g-s-t was accepted as part of the GNOME Desktop, the "rejected"
tools were services-admin and boot-a
On Thu, 2005-07-07 at 00:07 +1000, Jeff Waugh wrote:
>
> > If it is the first time a person starts gnome, maybe ask them to let us
> > know they are running gnome.
>
> The first time a (real) person starts GNOME, they're using a version
> delivered by their distributor or system administrator, ne
g-s-t is already part of gnome, right? So presumably including
additional g-s-t tools is up to the discretion of the g-s-t maintainers?
-Rob
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 19:46 +0200, Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> Hi everybody!,
>
> I haven't seen any proposal in the whole 2.11 period, so here's one to
> br
Hi everybody!,
I haven't seen any proposal in the whole 2.11 period, so here's one to
break the ice: I'm proposing services-admin from gnome-system-tools for
2.12, the last g-s-t version (1.3.0[.x]) compiles it by default,
featuring a dead easy GUI [1] to activate/deactivate services, both in
real
On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 14:11 -0400, Rodney Dawes wrote:
> Merging items could be useful. However, I don't think just shoving the
> same existing UI into multiple tabs in a single dialog will help really.
> It will just mean less things in the menu, and more confusion to users
> who are looking for t
On Mon, 2005-06-27 at 11:09 +0200, Reinout van Schouwen wrote:
> Hi Diego,
>
> Op Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:37:14 +0200, schreef Diego Gonzalez:
>
> > I have read the wiki page ( http://live.gnome.org/PreferencesRevisited )
>
> > http://www.es.gnome.org/~diego/app.html .
>
> Great work, Diego.
>
> T
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 12:10 -0400, William Jon McCann wrote:
> I think you could write a Qt dialog if you wanted to.
KDE guys already got some own screensaver app IIRC...
Ikke
___
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
http://mail
Jeff Waugh wrote:
Well, that we can definitely help with. :-) Is there a recent tarball
release? Do you want me to upload a release to ftp.gnome.org for you?
Would you consider proposing it for 2.12?
Just made one the other day actually. :)
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/ftp-release-list/2005-
> Lack of testing and feedback are the biggest problems right now.
Well, that we can definitely help with. :-) Is there a recent tarball
release? Do you want me to upload a release to ftp.gnome.org for you?
Would you consider proposing it for 2.12?
I've asked the Ubuntu desktop hackers to take
Hi Jeff,
Jeff Waugh wrote:
So, do you think there are any issues remaining with gnome-screensaver
before it can start being pushed towards inclusion in the Desktop release
(and thus, inclusion in distributions)? What do you think of using a common
user interface between GDM and the lock dialogue
Hi William,
It does indeed seem that you have address many of our concerns with
respect to the screen saver. Bastien filled me in. We are going to
discuss including it in Fedora today and will most likely get some test
packages and play around with it and give you feedback.
On Wed, 2005-07-
> gnome-screensaver is about a lot more than "making it look better." Let's
> try to move the conversation past that point.
(ROCK!)
> I'll be happy to try to answer any specific questions and criticism.
So, do you think there are any issues remaining with gnome-screensaver
before it can start
Hello John,
John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
Some people had some problems with it becoming a replacement. Not sure
what they were and I haven't investigated it myself.
I encourage you and others to actually look at how I've been trying to
design gnome-screensaver. I am eager to receive specific f
On Maw, 2005-07-05 at 16:21, Robert Love wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 14:37 +1200, John Williams wrote:
>
> > Essentially we propose modifying the GNOME About box to include a toggle
> > that indicate the user's permission to activate a program that would
> > periodically contact a central GNOME
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 11:30 +1200, John Williams wrote:
> Really? What does it say?
>
> "GNOME gets off its arse and tries to measure market share in the
> buildup to 10x10"
>
> or
>
> "GNOME acts like Evil Empire M$ by embedding secret software the spy on
> users"
>
> ?
>
> It is exactly th
On Tue, 2005-07-05 at 14:37 +1200, John Williams wrote:
> Essentially we propose modifying the GNOME About box to include a toggle
> that indicate the user's permission to activate a program that would
> periodically contact a central GNOME server. Information that would be
> transmitted and rec
> > I've been advocating a simple enter-your-email-we-won't-spam-you form
>
> I can't imagine any casual system will provide very reliable data so why
> worry about an email address.
It's a unique identifier, and we could offer to contact them *very* rarely
about new releases, etc.
> If it is
> I've been advocating a simple enter-your-email-we-won't-spam-you form
I can't imagine any casual system will provide very reliable data so why
worry about an email address. If it is the first time a person starts
gnome, maybe ask them to let us know they are running gnome. Also, what
about the
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 13:54 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> Please read the original thread, all of this has already been discussed:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.desktop/24408
And:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.desktop/21149
and:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnome.de
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 08:46 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 12:56 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 07:44 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:53 +0300, regatta wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > I know many people will not li
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 12:56 +0100, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 07:44 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> > On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:53 +0300, regatta wrote:
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > I know many people will not like me :) , but this just a question
> > > please don´t hate me :)
> > >
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 07:44 -0400, John (J5) Palmieri wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:53 +0300, regatta wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I know many people will not like me :) , but this just a question
> > please don´t hate me :)
> >
> > is there any plan to drop xscreensaver or at less do a heavy change
On Wed, 2005-07-06 at 10:53 +0300, regatta wrote:
> Hi
>
> I know many people will not like me :) , but this just a question
> please don´t hate me :)
>
> is there any plan to drop xscreensaver or at less do a heavy change on
> it (the ugly lock login didn´t change since I think gnome 2 or even
>
Daniel Veillard wrote:
>>can you be a bit more specific ? What exactly does not allow people to
>>run configure under Windows ? Lots of projects build fine under windows
>>using the standard autotools set.
>>
>>
> The serious libxml2 contributors on Windows don't run cygwin or migwin.
>Most
On Sun, Jul 03, 2005 at 04:24:38PM +0200, Thomas Vander Stichele wrote:
> > > >
> > > Why can't the necessary file be generated by Windows users?
> >
> > because configure doesn't run for people using standard Windows tools.
>
> Daniel,
>
> can you be a bit more specific ? What exactly does no
> > >
> > Why can't the necessary file be generated by Windows users?
>
> because configure doesn't run for people using standard Windows tools.
Daniel,
can you be a bit more specific ? What exactly does not allow people to
run configure under Windows ? Lots of projects build fine under window
Hi
I know many people will not like me :) , but this just a question
please don´t hate me :)
is there any plan to drop xscreensaver or at less do a heavy change on
it (the ugly lock login didn´t change since I think gnome 2 or even
before and always you have to reboot your machine if you lock the
50 matches
Mail list logo
