Hi All, On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Charlie Kravetz <[email protected] > wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tue, 11 Jan 2011 21:09:03 +0200 > Eero Tamminen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On tiistai 11 tammikuu 2011, Pasi Lallinaho wrote: > > > I don't think the strategy document is completely false, but trying to > > > strive for a lower memory footprint is not completely false. I think we > > > just need to find the golden path in between. > > I am simply looking to see whether or not it is worth changing any > default applications. If we are not the lowest memory footprint, but > very usable for the consumer, we made the goal. > > > > > And document better & more visible (e.g. in front page) what the balance > > between these goals means in practice? > > > > > > On tiistai 11 tammikuu 2011, Charlie Kravetz wrote: > > > And, no, we are not interested in throwing out accessibility. Instead, > > > we should be striving to be very accessible. There is a whole market > > > out there that can not use Xubuntu, because accessibility fails for > > > them. > > > > Do you have pointers to bugs? Is there a metabug listing all the issues? > > Yes, that would be the wrong that states: Orca does not work. > > > > > > On tiistai 11 tammikuu 2011, Lionel Le Folgoc wrote: > > > If we want to fix that, we should probably first try to fix this > > > strategy document not to set unreachable objectives with conflicting > > > focuses: either we focus on lightness a la lubuntu, and try to cope > with > > > reduced usability/integration, or we continue what we currently do, but > > > we clearly write it in the document ("memory footprint is not > > > important"), and then we can stop worrying about all these reviews... > > > > What about stating (besides the obvious technical detail of using XFce > > about which most users might not care so much) the goal simply as: > > > > "Accessible[1][2] and easy to use[2] alternative between Ubuntu/Kubuntu > > and more limited low-end distributions." > > > > [1] especially on lower end and thin client machines which don't have > > good GL acceleration, now that both Kubuntu and Ubuntu are going > > to require that. > > > > [2] This includes (memory using) stuff inherited from Ubuntu: > > - autodetection etc for extra hardware like printers, cameras etc. > > - localization. If you don't understand the language, > > the stuff isn't accessible nor easy to use. > > - helpers for disabled users. > > > > > > - Eero > > > > Hm, I guess it should be made clear that is has nothing to do with the > default applications in Natty at this point. If you wish to discuss the > stradegy document, start a new subject. > > > With regards to the memory footprint issue, I think that Charlie and Lionel are correct - having a low memory footprint isn't part of the strategy document. I think I forget that sometimes, and go off of the initial sort of "thrust" of Xubuntu, which was to be a lighter alternative. I'm not sure that this view is widely known outside of those who have access to the strategy document, though, so perhaps some education / outreach is in order about this. Particularly now that Xfce has a menu that is customizeable and can access remote shares through Thunar . . . Reminding people that Xubuntu is a viable alternate for *any* desktop operating system would be good. Similarly, for the people who gripe about MB's at boot (*cough* *cough* me *cough* *cough*), reminding them of what they get with those MBs (cups, gnome-keyring, etc.) might be worthwhile, too. It is not something I'm asking anyone to do . . . I will probably write about this in the coming week or so. I appreciate everyone's effort on the project, and am thankful for your constructive feedback. Jim
-- xubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
