In my opinion, for what it is worth, this sounds like an unfortunate, but necessary trade off.
I think we will lose a fairly large degree of testing and feedback, by forcing interested contributors to move Natty so early. However, I think it's rational to trade that for an increased focus on the ultimate quality of the new compiz-based unity in Natty and beyond. I think we'll get the most useful feedback from people *using* Unity. So, this means that we'll need to focus on supporting early Natty adopters, for instance paying more attention to quickly resolving adoption blocking bugs. My $.02 Cheers, Rick On Thu, 2010-11-18 at 19:25 +0100, Didier Roche wrote: > Hi everybody, > > As some of you may know, there have been some discussions about > backporting > "unity compiz" to maverick as we had backported unity to lucid with a > dedicated ppa and its own session. > > However, after some porting discussions and following the natty work I > think > we should perhaps consider not doing that because it's going to take > quite > some work for a moderated benefit and we would better spend those > efforts in > making natty rocking. > > Some bits what came from discussions between ubuntu desktop and dx > teams: > > * Why do we want to backport? - usually it's to make easier for users > to test the new version and give some feedback on it. The first round of > feedback will be about things not starting, or not working at all or > crashing, we will get that feedback from the natty users. Later on we > will want extra eyes on the user experience but by the time we are there > it will be really hard to backport the new stack due to new depends > (details on that later). > * New unity means new compiz which means users will have no working > desktop left, that's not something we should get our users in. Indeed, > the new > compiz is not made to be installed with the old one, the upgrade will > replace compiz > 0.8 but has lot of issues still: the configuration is not migrated, the > keybindings are not working, the workspace layout and switcher are not > working, the session registration is not working, the desktop capplet > needs to be updated, the GNOME keybindings capplet is not working. Some > of those > issues are fixed in natty, but we can't backporting every single GNOME > applications > to make them work in a maverick ppa. > - the new unity packaging is not made to have old and new unity > installed at the > same time so the old unity will not be installed anymore. > - the new unity is not usable as a desktop yet, which means the user > will not > have the old unity, compiz under GNOME will be broken is several ways > which let the GNOME session hard to use, the new unity is not ready for > production ... users who will want to give unity a try will just land in > a situation when they have no environment left they can use for work... > it would be less breakage to suggest them to update to natty where we > fix those integration issues. > * The new unity stack will be hard to backport - the next indicators > uploads will build-depends on gtk3 (even if we don't use it we need to > have libraries in natty to build gtk2 and gtk3 version to allow people > to start porting work), we use new glib api, etc. Backporting the stack > unity will need is going to turn into lot of work and a non trivial > task. > > We think users will have a better experience by trying unity on natty > and that we will gather more useful and coherent data, since it's likely > to be more stable than getting a working - and a less tested by our team > - backport. > > > didrocks on behalf of the ubuntu desktop and dx teams > > -- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
