I too think this is definitely somethi.g that is NECESSARY! I look forward to
anything regarding Fedora ...
- Reply message -
From: "Beartooth"
To:
Subject: Five Things in Fedora This Week (2014-04-01)
Date: Sat, Apr 12, 2014 1:13 pm
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 21:46:58 +0200,
HI
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 2:00 PM, Joe Zeff wrote:
> . And, their attitude toward third-party extensions to Gnome 3 back when
> it first came out, did nothing to change my mind: it took quite a while, as
> I recall, before they were willing to make the slightest effort to avoid
> breaking them
On 04/12/2014 10:34 AM, Beartooth wrote:
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 14:08:12 +0200, lee wrote:
>Joe Zeff writes:
>It has been established that it is irrelevant what users think. []
Where? How? (if that's not sarcasm)
I'm not sure at this point, but I presume that I was referring to G
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 14:08:12 +0200, lee wrote:
> Joe Zeff writes:
> It has been established that it is irrelevant what users think. []
Where? How? (if that's not sarcasm)
There were long discussions in the Nineties on various lists
(particularly ones hosted at RedHat, pred
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 21:46:58 +0200, Suvayu Ali wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 04:12:16PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
[]
>> This is the third installment of this series, and I'm still calibrating
>> a few things. I'm aiming at a wide audience, but I'm not quite sure how
>> much expla
On Wed, 02 Apr 2014 11:04:00 -0400, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Reiterating doesn't help much when people jump to conclusions rather
> than read through the details which are widely available online but in
> any case, the compatibility layer is primary designed for running X apps that
> haven't migrat
Hi
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 6:16 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
> Others are coming up with conjectures and presenting them as fact to
> back up a particular position (the one that it's the responsibility of
> projects to chase the latest and greatest infrastructure change).
>
There is no conjecture in w
On 3 April 2014 14:50, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
> I don't think we said anything contradictory at all. I pointed out
> that the Wayland developers are including a compatibility layer called
> XWayland that provides a backwards-compatible interface for
> applications and window managers that are
On 3 April 2014 14:16, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> HI
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
>>
>>
>> So no-one is allowed to ask questions on hear and have them answered
>> by anybody who knows what they're talking about?
>
>
> You seemed to have missed the point. I will state it mo
Hi
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Tim wrote:
> Allegedly, on or about 02 April 2014, Patrick O'Callaghan sent:
> > Kind of what I was trying to say. Those apps that do talk to X
> > directly, such as window managers, need to be rewritten or use a
> > compatibility layer in the meantime.
>
> Gn
Allegedly, on or about 02 April 2014, Patrick O'Callaghan sent:
> Kind of what I was trying to say. Those apps that do talk to X
> directly, such as window managers, need to be rewritten or use a
> compatibility layer in the meantime.
Gnome must learn how to use the new X, and the Gnome applicati
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/02/2014 04:44 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 16:04, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
>>>
>>> I originally missed this line in Rahul's email:
Other apps can use the compatib
HI
On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
>
> So no-one is allowed to ask questions on hear and have them answered
> by anybody who knows what they're talking about?
>
You seemed to have missed the point. I will state it more directly. You
are unwilling to spend your free time on l
On 2 April 2014 22:25, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
>>
>>
>> I would love to spend all my free time reading up about every new
>> project, but it's not going to happen. Sorry typo, "I would loathe
>> to..."
>
>
> If you care about new projects,
On 02.04.2014 23:37, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 22:13, poma wrote:
>> Long live the Phoronix! :)
>
>
> No idea what that means. I am well aware of Phoronix the Linux
> performance-testing and tech news site, but not of any relevance to
> this discussion.
>
Man, dunno bout ya, but I l
On 2 April 2014 22:13, poma wrote:
> Long live the Phoronix! :)
No idea what that means. I am well aware of Phoronix the Linux
performance-testing and tech news site, but not of any relevance to
this discussion.
--
Liam Proven * Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@ci
Hi
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
>
> I would love to spend all my free time reading up about every new
> project, but it's not going to happen. Sorry typo, "I would loathe
> to..."
>
If you care about new projects, you will have to read up on them. If you
don't, wait till i
On 02.04.2014 22:46, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 21:40, Ian Malone wrote:
>> For anyone who hasn't noticed by now, poma's observations can be
>> somewhat opaque to interpretation.
>
>
> Mir was a famous Russian space station in low Earth orbit. Its
> contemporary successor is the Intern
On 2 April 2014 21:40, Ian Malone wrote:
> For anyone who hasn't noticed by now, poma's observations can be
> somewhat opaque to interpretation.
Mir was a famous Russian space station in low Earth orbit. Its
contemporary successor is the International Space Station. Mark
Shuttleworth, founder of
On 2 April 2014 16:04, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
>>
>> I originally missed this line in Rahul's email:
>> > Other apps can use the compatibility layer called XWayland."
>>
>> But did read his reply to Lee:
>> >> Hm, not really useful when
On 2 April 2014 19:48, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 13:20, poma wrote:
>> Mir was a space station that operated in low Earth orbit from 1986 to
>> 2001, owned at first by the Soviet Union and then by Russia. Mir was the
>> first modular space station and was assembled in orbit from 1986 t
On 2 April 2014 20:09, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> This summary is inaccurate. Wayland has a stable protocol and is not tied to
> any specific desktop environment or deployment model. As I noted before,
> GNOME [1], KDE [2], Enlightenment [3] and others have already added support
> for Wayland and i
On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 04:12:16PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> 5tFTW note
> --
>
> This is the third installment of this series, and I'm still calibrating
> a few things. I'm aiming at a wide audience, but I'm not quite sure how
> much explaining I should do of general Fedora knowled
On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 12:54 +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 10:37, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > but a
> > redesign of the X protocol, i.e. it's not ABI compatible.
>
>
> No, it's not a redesign of anything. It is an entirely new GUI layer
> which entirely replaces X.11 - as has bee
Hi
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Liam Proven wrote:
> Technically, AIUI, as display servers, Mir and Wayland are quite
> similar. Wayland is somewhat tied into GNOME 3; Mir into Unity.
> Wayland focus on desktops, Mir on phones and tablets too, and their
> different input devices.
>
This sum
On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 19:48 +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
> Wayland is somewhat tied into GNOME 3
"tied into" could be taken to imply it's somehow dependent on Gnome,
which AFAIK is not the case.
poc
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
On 2 April 2014 13:20, poma wrote:
> Mir was a space station that operated in low Earth orbit from 1986 to
> 2001, owned at first by the Soviet Union and then by Russia. Mir was the
> first modular space station and was assembled in orbit from 1986 to 1996.
>
> How much is Tour de Mir per capita?
Hi
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
> I originally missed this line in Rahul's email:
> > Other apps can use the compatibility layer called XWayland."
>
> But did read his reply to Lee:
> >> Hm, not really useful when it doesn`t work with existing WMs ...
> > That would be the
On 02.04.2014 15:29, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On 04/02/2014 08:20 AM, poma wrote:
>> On 02.04.2014 13:54, Liam Proven wrote:
>>> On 2 April 2014 10:37, Patrick O'Callaghan
>>> wrote:
but a redesign of the X protocol, i.e. it's not ABI
compatible.
>>>
>>>
>>> No, it's not a redesign of
On 2 April 2014 15:05, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 04/02/2014 09:42 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
>> I know you weren't reply to me, but this is really the point I
>> wanted to make: to take advantage of Wayland it makes absolute
>> sense that applica
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/02/2014 09:42 AM, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 14:26, Stephen Gallagher
> wrote:
>
>
>>> Joe Zeff writes:
>>>
On 04/01/2014 09:49 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> That would be the responsibility of the WM's themselves.
> WM's
On 2 April 2014 14:26, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>> Joe Zeff writes:
>>
>>> On 04/01/2014 09:49 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
That would be the responsibility of the WM's themselves. WM's
have to add support. Not the other way around as you seem to
think.
>>>
>>> Which is why I poin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/02/2014 08:20 AM, poma wrote:
> On 02.04.2014 13:54, Liam Proven wrote:
>> On 2 April 2014 10:37, Patrick O'Callaghan
>> wrote:
>>> but a redesign of the X protocol, i.e. it's not ABI
>>> compatible.
>>
>>
>> No, it's not a redesign of anythin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/02/2014 08:08 AM, lee wrote:
> Joe Zeff writes:
>
>> On 04/01/2014 09:49 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>>> That would be the responsibility of the WM's themselves. WM's
>>> have to add support. Not the other way around as you seem to
>>> think.
>
On 02.04.2014 13:54, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 10:37, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
>> but a
>> redesign of the X protocol, i.e. it's not ABI compatible.
>
>
> No, it's not a redesign of anything. It is an entirely new GUI layer
> which entirely replaces X.11 - as has been done in both A
Joe Zeff writes:
> On 04/01/2014 09:49 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> That would be the responsibility of the WM's themselves. WM's have to
>> add support. Not the other way around as you seem to think.
>
> Which is why I pointed out that the question was if fvwm works with
> Wayland, not the oth
On 2 April 2014 10:37, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> but a
> redesign of the X protocol, i.e. it's not ABI compatible.
No, it's not a redesign of anything. It is an entirely new GUI layer
which entirely replaces X.11 - as has been done in both Android and
Mac OS X and which Canonical are attempti
On Wed, 2014-04-02 at 09:03 +0100, Ian Malone wrote:
> On 2 April 2014 05:49, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:52 PM, lee wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Hm, not really useful when it doesn`t work with existing WMs ...
> >
> >
> > That would be the responsibility of the WM'
On 2 April 2014 05:49, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Hi
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:52 PM, lee wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hm, not really useful when it doesn`t work with existing WMs ...
>
>
> That would be the responsibility of the WM's themselves. WM's have to add
> support. Not the other way around as you
On 04/01/2014 09:49 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
That would be the responsibility of the WM's themselves. WM's have to
add support. Not the other way around as you seem to think.
Which is why I pointed out that the question was if fvwm works with
Wayland, not the other way around.
--
users mai
Hi
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:52 PM, lee wrote:
>
> Hm, not really useful when it doesn`t work with existing WMs ...
>
That would be the responsibility of the WM's themselves. WM's have to add
support. Not the other way around as you seem to think.
Rahul
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fed
Rahul Sundaram writes:
> Hi
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:29 PM, lee wrote:
>
>>
>> > Trying Wayland (and Gnome 3.12)
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Wayland is the upcoming successor to the X11 graphics protocol which
>> > powers our desktops. It's not done yet, but you can try
Hi
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:29 PM, lee wrote:
>
> > Trying Wayland (and Gnome 3.12)
> > ---
> >
> > Wayland is the upcoming successor to the X11 graphics protocol which
> > powers our desktops. It's not done yet, but you can try it first in
> > Fedora.
>
> Does it wo
On 04/01/2014 02:29 PM, lee wrote:
Does it work with fvwm?
I'm not sure, but it might be more appropriate to ask if fvwm works with
Wayland.
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/user
Matthew Miller writes:
> Trying Wayland (and Gnome 3.12)
> ---
>
> Wayland is the upcoming successor to the X11 graphics protocol which
> powers our desktops. It's not done yet, but you can try it first in
> Fedora.
Does it work with fvwm?
--
Fedora release 20 (Hei
Reposted from
http://fedoramagazine.org/five-things-in-fedora-this-week-2014-04-01/
Fedora is a big project, and it’s hard to follow it all. This series
highlights interesting happenings in five different areas every week.
It isn't comprehensive news coverage — just quick summaries with lin
46 matches
Mail list logo
