Sorry, I really do not understand the logic of this. If one does not use eee-control, having it or having it not blacklisted makes no difference and does not break the unity experience at all. If one uses eee-control, having it not blacklisted makes it usable without messing with gconf. Exactly the same reasoning that I guess brought to the whitelisting of the hp-tray.
I would push this reasoning forward. What is the reason for having all apps using systray blacklisted by default and only some exceptions whitelisted? This breaks the user experience for all that still depend on old applications. I think it would have been much better to have all apps whitelisted by default, and blacklist those for which the transition to the indicators is completed. Otherwise, either: 1) the unity interface refreshening actually means that for too many things *the interface is gconf* and that novices should be prepared to learn it if they want to use ubuntu (as the blossoming of tons of blogs such as the one by IKT proves) or 2) users should receive in advance a friendly warning that anyone needing now or perspectively to rely on apps that are not explicitly ported to ubuntu should not use ubuntu, but at best one of its variants. Please remember that apart form eee-control, there may be tons of people who perspectively might need to use some commercial/legacy/cad/whatever application that was designed at a time when there was a system tray and that unfortunately will not change in a release cycle timeframe. Thanks anyway! ** Summary changed: - applications using system tray do not work in unity + legacy applications (using system tray) do not work in unity without a porting effort -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/773979 Title: legacy applications (using system tray) do not work in unity without a porting effort -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
