* Re: [gentoo-dev] desktop
@ 2003-08-28 13:21 99% ` foser
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: foser @ 2003-08-28 13:21 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 14:52, dams@idm.fr wrote:
> Maybe add a vanilla flags, that can be unset. When unset, the DE are
> preconfigured and gentoo touched.
> The pb is that you want vanilla, but you want also some core feature like
> centralized menu system, which is not compatible. So either we decide not to
> include such features, or to have a flag.
I'm quite against this, there should be one Gentoo to rule them all. I'm
not against adding some extra patches, as long as they add clear
functionality we can maintain (this is most important). No need for
flags for vanilla and not so vanilla.
The menu system is a difficult one i know, but in reality there are few
people who use more than one DE. We cater the masses well at the moment,
those who want to work with a different look 'n feel every day should be
able to handle the downsides.
The proposed implementation i have seen i dislike for several reasons,
but mostly because of the reasons i stated down here in my last mail
(compliance part). I think other possible solutions may be a lot more
workable and should be investigated first. But these are details, this
isn't the place to discuss this.
> >> - write guidelines to be more (free)desktop compliant, to be used by the whole
> >> gentoo devs for their packages.
> >
> > We shouldn't be compliant, we should push upstream developers to be or
> > work on their packages being compliant. Us providing some hackish layer
> > of compliance is a recipe for disaster. It is fighting symptoms, while
> > you should be attacking the problem by its root. I don't see our already
> > heavily pressured teams do all sorts of compliance work.
> >
> > And no, just hiring a few more people is no solution if you want to have
> > the same quality/involvement.
>
> That's a possibility, but that means that, as a linux distribution, we don't
> provide additional compliance. If you keep the desktop vanilla, we don't either
> provide additional desktop default. That can be what we want. But what will
> provide gentoo linux, as desktop, then?
We provide the power to work with the desktop as intended upstream. The
GNOME Desktop is an idea as a whole, we provide it as it is. And for say
corporate users you could say they could easily adapt their installs to
their needs, without the necessity to hack out all sorts of distro
specific stuff. Or for granny's email machine (installed by her
son-in-law) she just get what she needs and not all sorts of extra cruft
(no granny doesn't need no CD burn tools or LDAP support in her mailer).
> I think a perfect corporate desktop would :
>
> - be cheap
> - be installable by not so good technical guys quickly
> - be useable at soon as it is installed
'emerge gnome' and maybe in the future (but we lack time as it is)
'emerge gnome-office' and off you go. I suppose KDE could create similar
meta ebuilds.
>
> Now if the guy has to configure each workstation, it's not very convenient...
Humm, that wouldn't be a bright guy. It would be better to work from one
'image' machine in a workstation situation. I don't really see how you
mean configuration beyond that. User configuration is ok by default
mostly (at least for GNOME) and it is up to them to alter it to their
preference.
- foser
--
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
2003-08-28 11:15 ` foser
2003-08-28 12:52 ` dams
2003-08-28 13:21 99% ` foser
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox