public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
Search results ordered by [date|relevance]  view[summary|nested|Atom feed]
thread overview below | download: 
* Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop
  @ 2003-08-28 10:51 99%       ` dams
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: dams @ 2003-08-28 10:51 UTC (permalink / raw
  To: Paul de Vrieze; +Cc: gentoo-dev

Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@gentoo.org> said:

> On Thursday 28 August 2003 10:08, dams@gentoo.org wrote:
>> Spider <spider@gentoo.org> said:
>> > begin  quote
>> > On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 00:22:51 +0200
>> >
>> > dams@idm.fr wrote:
>> >> * What is desktop :
>> >> desktop would be the project responsible of the desktop part of gentoo
>> >> Linux, without making global decision, like : should we build a
>> >> special product for desktop, should we have a modified install, should
>> >> we restrict some possibility to default...
>> >
>> > I'm quite against this turn of development as it will split our meager
>> > develpomentteam even further and direct resources at maintaining two
>> > trees in paralell. Even if one is just "desktop cludge" to make the
>> > DesktopDistribution work, it would require Time and Development.
>>
>> Maybe I badly expressed myself, I meant that desktop won't build a
>> special product for desktop, won't ask if we should have a modified
>> install, or if we restrict some possibility to default...
>>
>
> Let me say this about what I view as the responsibilities of -desktop. It has 
> two main responsibilities, the first one is to manage all current desktop 
> packages (delegated to the appropriate subprojects).
>
> The second one is to research (yes research) how the gentoo desktop experience 
> can be improved. That includes things like the menusystem. Some sensible 
> session system (resp. for starting a windowmanager, which is currently quite 
> nonstandard and depending on the display manager (not windowmanager)) and I'm 
> sure there will be enough other things.

The problem is that the conclusion will tend to tune/modify the DE, and it
seems that people here don't want that, they want vanilla DE. For ex., menu
system is the first improvment I think of, but it has a big impact on the
look&feel of the DE. If we don't want DE tuned, then we cannot use debian like
menu system.


>
> That research leads sometimes to proposed changes. Each of these changes will 
> be judged according to a.o. how easy it is to implement them, how standard 
> they are, whether they conform to the gentoo way, etc.

This can be done if we have decided before if we want or not have a gentoo
desktop touch. I don't think it is now decided.

>
> The general idea being that if it is possible everything should just work 
> after the emerge command has been completed. This also might involve changing 
> default configuration files to work with the way things are installed in 
> gentoo (like specifying the correct location of programs). This does however 
> not mean that just anything can be changed in the default configurations. 
> Look and feel should be as standard as possible. (for example k3b should just 
> work out of the box and know allready where cdrecord is installed, etc.)

The last example is not a desktop issue for me. It's the maintainer to do this,
and to ask the cdrecord maintainer informations, if he needs it.


-- 
dams

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


^ permalink raw reply	[relevance 99%]

Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2003-08-27 22:22     [gentoo-dev] desktop dams
2003-08-27 22:58     ` Spider
2003-08-28  8:08       ` dams
2003-08-28 10:25         ` Paul de Vrieze
2003-08-28 10:51 99%       ` dams

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox