On 2/7/06, Dan Winship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So to sum up: design by committee is bad, endless debates that result in
code not actually being written are bad, design by very small teams is
good, software with a unified vision is good, trying out cool new UI
ideas is good, free code at least
Le mardi 07 février 2006 à 15:55 +0100, Christian Fredrik Kalager
Schaller a écrit :
Hi,
While it would be good to get fixes and improvements right away I do
think its to hard to criticize anyone for holding back a bit on things
they are doing. Being able to ship something first is an
Le mercredi 08 février 2006 à 04:49 -0200, Evandro Fernandes Giovanini a
écrit :
I think the process used by Novell is very common in the GNOME community
(and Free Software in general).
For example take metacity. Sawfish was the default window manager, so
Havoc could have started a
El mi, 08--2006 a las 10:10 +0100, Manu Cornet escribi:
I'm not saying taking our time to discuss changes is wrong (of course
not). But sometimes I just need to try something out. If there's a new
feature proposal, and some developers find it is a bad idea, but it
basically looks like a
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:36 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Dan Winship
But it seems to me now that everyone other than me (and possibly Jono) is
actually talking about Xgl, and I have no comment on that.
(OTOH, if you really were saying that Novell's writing a replacement for
the
quote who=Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller
I was not talking exclusively about Novell, Xgl, or the new panel
applet. I was talking about a serious problem in our community, and the
destructive ideas, memes and role models that support it.
Isn't what we got here exactly what has been
On Tue, 2006-02-07 at 19:53, Elijah Newren wrote:
So, we have two merged window manager + compositing manager codebases
now. My question is whether and how we can merge these.
I think that's precisely the heart of the problem: decisions in the
GNOME project are made not to hurt community
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 11:01 +0100, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller
wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:36 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Dan Winship
But it seems to me now that everyone other than me (and possibly Jono) is
actually talking about Xgl, and I have no comment on that.
Hi,
Evandro Fernandes Giovanini said:
I think the process used by Novell is very common in the GNOME community
(and Free Software in general).
Compare contrast with Spatial nautilus and the GTK+ file selector.
It's also funny that you should pick Metacity - Havoc wrote a document
on his
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 12:57 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
This course of action will create a time when GNOME goes the way of
propriortary UNIX: Tru64, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX... imagine a
world with Novell Desktop, Topaz, Java Desktop, the Hatrack Environment:
all competing products...
Jeff said (after 'Sorry State') ...
..
I put it in emotive terms because *someone* has to offset all the hugging
and back-slapping about Dan's mail. All this positivity about a mail that
basically says this community shit is too hard! fuck it!, and just puts
that meme right back in centre
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 12:57 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
This course of action will create a time when GNOME goes the way of
propriortary UNIX: Tru64, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX... imagine a
world with Novell Desktop, Topaz, Java Desktop, the Hatrack Environment:
all competing
I put it in emotive terms because *someone* has to offset all the
hugging
and back-slapping about Dan's mail. All this positivity about a
mail that
basically says this community shit is too hard! fuck it!, and
just puts
that meme right back in centre square. Nat and Miguel blogging
about
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 10:42 +0100, Arturo González wrote:
El mié, 08--2006 a las 10:10 +0100, Manu Cornet escribió:
I'm not saying taking our time to discuss changes is wrong (of course
not). But sometimes I just need to try something out. If there's a new
feature proposal, and some
quote who=Thom Holwerda
What I am missing in your replies is some sort of thank you to Novell.
They seem to have done some serious amount of work -- behind closed
doors, but they did it. They released their code for everyone to benefit
from. So what is the big problem?
So, again, despite
On Tue, 2006-02-07 at 10:25 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
On 2/7/06, Calum Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh, we're just over a week *past* UI freeze. ;-)
I know, but didn't we always do UI reviews after the freeze, with
s/the freeze/a freeze/
maintainers having special release team
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 11:01 +0100, Christian Fredrik Kalager Schaller
wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:36 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Dan Winship
But it seems to me now that everyone other than me (and possibly Jono) is
actually talking about Xgl, and
quote who=Thom Holwerda
But my point remains. How far are you willing to go? Must developers
adhere to some sort of code of conduct-- a sort of extra set of
requirements-- before they can contribute to the GNOME project?
Because that is kind of how your viewpoint comes across here.
I don't
It isn't about Design by community but Design IN the community. The
former assumes everyone has something useful to say, the latter merely
recognizes the value of code review, security checking, third party
input that -may- be valuable, and possibly getting help.
If you design stuff in secret
On Mer, 2006-02-08 at 12:07 +0100, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
This course of action will create a time when GNOME goes the way of
propriortary UNIX: Tru64, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX... imagine a
world with Novell Desktop, Topaz, Java Desktop, the Hatrack Environment:
all competing products...
quote who=Alan Cox
It isn't about Design by community but Design IN the community.
*Exactly* - and it's so easy to fall to laziness in the face of all the
challenges Dan so eloquently explained in his email... and that's what has
been happening in GNOME for a long time now. Let's break the
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 12:45 +0100, Arturo González wrote:
El mié, 08--2006 a las 12:29 +0100, Rodrigo Moya escribió:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 10:42 +0100, Arturo González wrote:
El mié, 08--2006 a las 10:10 +0100, Manu Cornet escribió:
I'm not saying taking our time to discuss
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 19:51 +0800, James Henstridge wrote:
Isn't what we got here exactly what has been asked for? That 'big'
changes to GNOME needs to come from 'outside' projects? Havoc for
instance was advocating that in his blog entries. So if people are
unhappy about XYZ in GNOME, for
ons, 08,.02.2006 kl. 23.20 +1100, skrev Jeff Waugh:
quote who=Alan Cox
It isn't about Design by community but Design IN the community.
*Exactly* - and it's so easy to fall to laziness in the face of all the
challenges Dan so eloquently explained in his email... and that's what has
been
On 2/8/06, Calum Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 2006-02-07 at 10:25 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
On 2/7/06, Calum Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh, we're just over a week *past* UI freeze. ;-)
I know, but didn't we always do UI reviews after the freeze, with
s/the
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 11:09 +, Jamie McCracken wrote:
Rodrigo Moya wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 12:57 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
This course of action will create a time when GNOME goes the way of
propriortary UNIX: Tru64, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, IRIX... imagine a
world with Novell
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 08:56 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
Just wanted to say, Calum (and perhaps others listening in) that I
firmly believe that, done right, the UI reviews can be very, very
useful. It is clear that we're not doing it very well, though- perhaps
it needs to be more proactive, and
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 14:20 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
I know some very wise people have decided, apparently without much
discussion with the community, that GNOME would switch to Subversion.
But I keep thinking that, although Subversion is much better than CVS,
maybe we would
Hi,
I know some very wise people have decided, apparently without much
discussion with the community, that GNOME would switch to Subversion.
But I keep thinking that, although Subversion is much better than CVS,
maybe we would benefit more from a distributed version control system,
like
quote who=Anna Marie Dirks
What a big jerkbird! So lazy! So community-tearing! Definitely the work of
an evil, evil noncontributor.
Anna, as I mentioned in another email, this frustration is about a broader
problem we have in our community than the particular acts of contributing
organisations
Alan Cox wrote:
So if Fedora, Ubuntu and every other Gnome using distribution also start
doing tons of private development
(Excluding Xgl, there was hardly tons of private development.)
then trying to jam it all in CVS
afterwards how do you expect Gnome to develop when all these variants
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:20:15PM +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
perhaps but the real question is why isn't this a branch in CVS? Why is
there a need for clandestine development?
Maybe because CVS branches are inherently complicated. And maybe
because you have to ask
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:41:16PM +, Calum Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 08:56 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
Just wanted to say, Calum (and perhaps others listening in) that I
firmly believe that, done right, the UI reviews can be very, very
useful. It is clear that we're not doing
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:10 +, Ross Burton wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 14:20 +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
I know some very wise people have decided, apparently without much
discussion with the community, that GNOME would switch to Subversion.
But I keep thinking that,
ons, 08,.02.2006 kl. 10.55 -0500, skrev Dan Winship:
Alan Cox wrote:
So if Fedora, Ubuntu and every other Gnome using distribution also start
doing tons of private development
(Excluding Xgl, there was hardly tons of private development.)
then trying to jam it all in CVS
afterwards
So it seems that the desktop wide decision to load all modules with
G_MODULE_BIND_LOCAL, for performance reasons, may break python
extensions. So far, nautilus-python was affected by this. Do people
have any suggestions? Clearly Python has to be fixed, but that is a
long term fix; how to fix
Davyd Madeley wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:41:16PM +, Calum Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 08:56 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
Just wanted to say, Calum (and perhaps others listening in) that I
firmly believe that, done right, the UI reviews can be very, very
useful. It is
On Mon, 6 Feb 2006, Wouter Bolsterlee wrote:
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 20:56:56 +0100
From: Wouter Bolsterlee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: Gnome-utils branched to gnome-2-14
P?? Mon, Feb 06, 2006 at 11:41:16AM -0600, Shaun McCance skrev:
On Mon, 2006-02-06
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 17:43 +0100, Kjartan Maraas wrote:
In a sense, but a theme is more self-contained and wouldn't need review
in full the samme way that an extension to the panel menu code would.
It's not an extension to the panel menu code. It's not even a patch.
It's a completely separate
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 00:07 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
If we're going with the new Clearlooks, does that need any sort of
UI or a11y review? I know that there have been sweeping changes.
There is a lot more blue.
Theme changes, even to the default theme, haven't historically come
under the
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, Ross Burton wrote:
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 15:28:33 +
From: Ross Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Calum Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: UI Review
On Tue, 2006-02-07 at 15:17 +, Calum Benson wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 04:01 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
quote who=Havoc Pennington
Jeff, you're right that Steve Jobs style big press release is
incompatible with community development (though I don't think it's a moral
issue perhaps, I think it's legitimate to make the tradeoff as long as
ons, 08,.02.2006 kl. 12.09 -0500, skrev Rodney Dawes:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 17:43 +0100, Kjartan Maraas wrote:
In a sense, but a theme is more self-contained and wouldn't need review
in full the samme way that an extension to the panel menu code would.
It's not an extension to the panel
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 17:36 +, Alan Horkan wrote:
I'd appreciate raving hordes of UI-zealots attacking Sound Juicer with
its new (well, from 2.12) playback mode, if only so that I can ignore
most of the feedback.
Sound Juicer was a great ripper.
Sound Juicer was not a music player.
Rodney Dawes wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 17:43 +0100, Kjartan Maraas wrote:
In a sense, but a theme is more self-contained and wouldn't need review
in full the samme way that an extension to the panel menu code would.
It's not an extension to the panel menu code. It's not even a patch.
It's
Hi,
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 12:09 -0500, Rodney Dawes wrote:
It's not an extension to the panel menu code. It's not even a patch.
It's a completely separate applet. This is in fact, in no way different
than a theme engine in terms of integrating it upstream, into a larger
conglomerate package.
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 23:57 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 02:20:15PM +, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
perhaps but the real question is why isn't this a branch in CVS? Why is
there a need for clandestine development?
Maybe because CVS branches are
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Ross Burton wrote:
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 18:10:42 +
From: Ross Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Alan Horkan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: desktop-devel-list@gnome.org desktop-devel-list@gnome.org
Subject: Re: UI Review
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 17:36 +, Alan Horkan wrote:
On 2/7/06, Matthias Clasen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
b) I believe we should pick a file format that did not already look
antiquated when it was first employed in wanda the fish 5 years ago.
Even gif animations look modern and featureful compared to this.
FWIW we chose to use ANIs for animations
On 2/8/06, Jamie McCracken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wrt to yer blog post regarding code drops at release time, I hope you
and Novell can be persuaded to do more development in the open just for
the sake of fairness (as we currently have a level playing field with
the vast majority of Gnome
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 17:19 +, Calum Benson wrote:
On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 00:07 +0800, Davyd Madeley wrote:
If we're going with the new Clearlooks, does that need any sort of
UI or a11y review? I know that there have been sweeping changes.
There is a lot more blue.
Theme changes,
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 21:27 +0200, Tommi Komulainen wrote:
On 2/7/06, Matthias Clasen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
b) I believe we should pick a file format that did not already look
antiquated when it was first employed in wanda the fish 5 years ago.
Even gif animations look modern and
On 2/8/06, Rodney Dawes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 21:27 +0200, Tommi Komulainen wrote:
On 2/7/06, Matthias Clasen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
b) I believe we should pick a file format that did not already look
antiquated when it was first employed in wanda the fish 5
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 11:28 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote:
If you guys want a specific productive suggestion, I think these are two
de facto directions that could just be adopted; one is a kind of
building block platform shared among the GNOME desktop, Maemo, GPE, XFCE
even [2]; it might
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:33 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
That spec is a one-man show, I assume then ?
The Icon Naming Spec? Or the APNG spec? I don't know much aobut the APNG
spec really. It was brought up in #tango a week or so ago, when we were
discussing animations and how to deal with them.
On 2/8/06, Rodney Dawes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 15:33 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
That spec is a one-man show, I assume then ?
The Icon Naming Spec? Or the APNG spec? I don't know much aobut the APNG
spec really. It was brought up in #tango a week or so ago, when we
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 21:54 +0100, Jon K Hellan wrote:
However, if we decide to target a niche audience, on a niche operating
system, that's niche squared. I doubt if that's sustainable.
Didn't say niche, I said specific. The group can still be large. There
are many, many well-defined subsets
quote who=Havoc Pennington
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 21:54 +0100, Jon K Hellan wrote:
However, if we decide to target a niche audience, on a niche operating
system, that's niche squared. I doubt if that's sustainable.
Didn't say niche, I said specific. The group can still be large. There are
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro wrote:
And I have a case when I forgot to add a regular tag at the start of a
branch. So now I'm finding it very hard to obtain a diff of all changes
since I started the branch. I'll have to do it manually, file by file,
looking at revision
Kalle Vahlman wrote:
I mean, I'm making a theme engine (for Maemo) but haven't released
anything yet. Will you behead me for being secretive when I do or just
let it slide because I'm tweeny-tiny myself and not a big company?
I only take exception when a large company (especially one that
On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 17:06 +, Alan Horkan wrote:
I remain baffled how the file chooser button was designed.
Everywhere we have text entries followed by a Browse button but the File
Chooser button looks nothing like this.
Instead of a widget to encapsulate this established idea there
So, to give some positive input to this discussion, if gif,
ani (or more esoteric formats like mng or apng) are not acceptable
because they are not already supported by gnome and kde, how about
making use of a mechanism already present in the icon theme spec, and
define a set of extra keys for
Le mercredi 08 février 2006 à 23:17 +, Jamie McCracken a écrit :
Hopefully, Novell will release the source soonish and put this issue to
rest.
Please, we're mainly talking about a problem that is not about Novell.
We should let Novell people know that we love them, as much as we love
the
Hi Davyd,
Le mardi 07 février 2006 à 12:06 +0800, Davyd Madeley a écrit :
Has the official list of what's in and what's out been given for
GNOME 2.14 yet?
Several contentious modules have been proposed for inclusion and
several version holds have also been requested by people.
The
Here's my personal opinion.
Le jeudi 09 février 2006 à 08:27 +0100, Vincent Untz a écrit :
Here's the list of modules that are waiting for a decision:
+ libnotify notification-daemon
= depends on libsexy. What should we do about it? Add it to the
desktop set? Say it's a
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 08:27:43AM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
So, we (the release team) seriously sucked on this. We're having a
meeting on Friday to take some decisions.
Here's the new modules that are in:
+ pyorbit
+ deskbar-applet
+ fast-user-switch-applet
+
On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 08:33:39AM +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
+ libnotify notification-daemon
= depends on libsexy. What should we do about it? Add it to the
desktop set? Say it's a blessed dependency? Don't accept it?
I'm opposed to have another library for general widgets
67 matches
Mail list logo