[gentoo-dev] Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[gentoo-dev] Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 785 bytes --]

This is more food for thought to start a discussion on new category
names. With Wayland becoming more of a reality every day. I think some
of the x11-* categories may need to change. Stuff in there may not be
bound to X and can run on Wayland or X.

Examples
x11-libs/gtk+
x11-terms/terminology

Not sure what better "universal" category names would be. But seems it
maybe time for a discussion on such and some new categories and package
moves. Given thus stuff can run under X or Wayland. Not sure x11 makes
sense anymore.

I can do this on my own in my own overlay. But likely best for official
categories as this effects the tree not just others overlays etc. I do
not really have any ideas for better names. Just seems like a need.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Duncan]

William L. Thomson Jr. posted on Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:01:08 -0400 as
excerpted:

> This is more food for thought to start a discussion on new category
> names. With Wayland becoming more of a reality every day. I think some
> of the x11-* categories may need to change. Stuff in there may not be
> bound to X and can run on Wayland or X.
> 
> Examples x11-libs/gtk+
> x11-terms/terminology
> 
> Not sure what better "universal" category names would be. But seems it
> maybe time for a discussion on such and some new categories and package
> moves. Given thus stuff can run under X or Wayland. Not sure x11 makes
> sense anymore.
> 
> I can do this on my own in my own overlay. But likely best for official
> categories as this effects the tree not just others overlays etc. I do
> not really have any ideas for better names. Just seems like a need.

That could be a lot of package-move churn.  It arguably might make sense 
to keep the current names "for legacy reasons".  (Or not.  Just 
speculating here.)

FWIW, there was some related discussion awhile back on USE=X, proposing 
USE=gui instead, but I don't know what became of it.  Perhaps gui-* 
category names if that's actually moving forward, in ordered to maintain 
a bit of consistency and for lack of a better idea?

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1220 bytes --]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:37:09 +0000 (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
>
> That could be a lot of package-move churn.  It arguably might make
> sense to keep the current names "for legacy reasons".  (Or not.  Just 
> speculating here.)

For sure it would require touching lots of packages. Its not really a
minor thing, thus bring it up for discussion. Likely need to take into
consideration sooner than later.

For any new packages, likely best they go into proper new categories
then continuing on the legacy. Then it becomes a matter of what to do
for others. Lots of packages moves would not be fun.

Though something similar was done recently with vpn packages.
 
> FWIW, there was some related discussion awhile back on USE=X,
> proposing USE=gui instead, but I don't know what became of it.
> Perhaps gui-* category names if that's actually moving forward, in
> ordered to maintain a bit of consistency and for lack of a better
> idea? 

I think that is different as you do need X now to differentiate between
say X and Wayland. If it was just generic stuff then GUI would make
sense. Though usually other stuff handles that, gtk, qt, etc USE flag.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Raymond Jennings]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1853 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:

> William L. Thomson Jr. posted on Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:01:08 -0400 as
> excerpted:
>
> > This is more food for thought to start a discussion on new category
> > names. With Wayland becoming more of a reality every day. I think some
> > of the x11-* categories may need to change. Stuff in there may not be
> > bound to X and can run on Wayland or X.
> >
> > Examples x11-libs/gtk+
> > x11-terms/terminology
> >
> > Not sure what better "universal" category names would be. But seems it
> > maybe time for a discussion on such and some new categories and package
> > moves. Given thus stuff can run under X or Wayland. Not sure x11 makes
> > sense anymore.
> >
> > I can do this on my own in my own overlay. But likely best for official
> > categories as this effects the tree not just others overlays etc. I do
> > not really have any ideas for better names. Just seems like a need.
>
> That could be a lot of package-move churn.  It arguably might make sense
> to keep the current names "for legacy reasons".  (Or not.  Just
> speculating here.)
>
> FWIW, there was some related discussion awhile back on USE=X, proposing
> USE=gui instead, but I don't know what became of it.  Perhaps gui-*
> category names if that's actually moving forward, in ordered to maintain
> a bit of consistency and for lack of a better idea?
>

I think "USE=X" should be reserved for X specific stuff.  If it's being
used to control gui in general IMHO that's not appropriate.  It's bad on
principle and is likely to cause practical difficulties later if confusion
arises vs competing guis, like qt, gtk, wayland, etc.

>
> --
> Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
> "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
> and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2589 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 840 bytes --]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:01:08 -0400
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:

> Examples
> x11-libs/gtk+
> x11-terms/terminology

"desktop" came to mind for me for some reason.

"desktop-apps/"
"desktop-libs/"
"desktop-terms/"
"desktop-themes/"

All appeal more to me than

"gui-apps/"
"gui-libs/"
"gui-terms/"
"gui-themes/"

"Gui" just seems too vague and generic here, and also feels like
double-dipping. 

And it will be additionally confusing if any of those apps don't have
any GUI, like for instance:

  gui-apps/xset

That just seems backwards to me.

   desktop-apps/xset

Alright, I guess.

Maybe a category for non-graphical desktop-related tools should exist
instead.

   desktop-tools/xset 

IDK.

I'm not committed to anything I've said here, just food for thought.





[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Duncan]

Kent Fredric posted on Sun, 03 Sep 2017 18:44:00 +1200 as excerpted:

> On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:01:08 -0400
> "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> 
>> Examples
>> x11-libs/gtk+
>> x11-terms/terminology
> 
> "desktop" came to mind for me for some reason.
> 
> "desktop-apps/"
> "desktop-libs/"
> "desktop-terms/"
> "desktop-themes/"
> 
> All appeal more to me than
> 
> "gui-apps/"
> "gui-libs/"
> "gui-terms/"
> "gui-themes/"
> 
> "Gui" just seems too vague and generic here, and also feels like
> double-dipping. 

Vague/generic agreed in general.  I'm not sure enough what you meant
by double-dipping (tho I have a couple ideas) to say I agree there.

But...

> And it will be additionally confusing if any of those apps don't have
> any GUI, like for instance:
> 
>   gui-apps/xset
> 
> That just seems backwards to me.
> 
>    desktop-apps/xset
> 
> Alright, I guess.
> 
> Maybe a category for non-graphical desktop-related tools should exist
> instead.
> 
>    desktop-tools/xset 

How many of these xorg-suite apps have-been/will-be actually ported to
wayland?  I was under the impression that most of them will not be
ported, and it'll be the up to whatever compositor and accompanying
toolkit you choose to provide that functionality, as they generally
already do... to a point.  Certainly the compositor (aka
super-window-manager) is the only app allowed to control/delegate many
of the functions xset, xrandr, etc, set for xorg in common, for
security reasons, because wayland simply doesn't let one app mess with
and spy on another app's input stream, for instance, as X does.  If only
the compositor and/or apps it specifically authenticates for the purpose
are allowed to do such settings, it quickly becomes a toolkit/DE function,
and generic versions don't make a lot of sense as they simply won't work.

In which case, keeping the "legacy" x11-* names for such x-specific apps,
the better to eventually deprecate, mask, and send off to the
user-maintained "X-sunset" overlay, may make the most sense and will
almost certainly be less trouble.

And where there is a port, as presumably there is or will be for
many of the x11-libs, does it make sense to keep separate x11-*
and wayland-* categories where they differ, or throw them all together
in a heap?

Meanwhile, the objection to "desktop-*" is that it may well look about
as relevant in a few years as "mainframe-*" would look today, due to
mobile, wearables, and possibly ultimately injectibles.

> IDK.
> 
> I'm not committed to anything I've said here, just food for thought.

Same here.  My biggest concern is simply avoiding, if possible, setting
up new categories now, only to have to redo them in 2-5 when hindsight
makes them look stupid.  It may not be possible, but to the extent it
is...  Other than that, I've no particular shed color preference, other
than don't make it 50 characters long or something so exotic we
have to refer to it as "the category formerly known as x11-*." =:^)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4236 bytes --]

On Sun, 3 Sep 2017 23:37:34 +0000 (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:


> Vague/generic agreed in general.  I'm not sure enough what you meant
> by double-dipping (tho I have a couple ideas) to say I agree there.

Yeah. To an extent these days its just "app" practically *implies* a
GUI.

It doesn't, strictly, speaking, but its just such a generic term I have
a hard time imagining somebody using it as a classifier.


> How many of these xorg-suite apps have-been/will-be actually ported to
> wayland?  I was under the impression that most of them will not be
> ported, and it'll be the up to whatever compositor and accompanying
> toolkit you choose to provide that functionality, as they generally
> already do... to a point.  Certainly the compositor (aka
> super-window-manager) is the only app allowed to control/delegate many
> of the functions xset, xrandr, etc, set for xorg in common, for
> security reasons, because wayland simply doesn't let one app mess with
> and spy on another app's input stream, for instance, as X does.  If
> only the compositor and/or apps it specifically authenticates for the
> purpose are allowed to do such settings, it quickly becomes a
> toolkit/DE function, and generic versions don't make a lot of sense
> as they simply won't work.

Well, in this case it was more an example of "a tool that has some
desktop mechanics, but does not in fact have any Graphical User
Interface".

"xset" augments *the environment itself*

And I simply reasoned that, this, being Unix, we'd likely have
equivalent, GUI-less applications that perform various display related
services, like xbacklight, or transset, or xrandr. 

I'm not saying those binaries would literally be ported, only that
their utility is such that I'd expect to see equivalents/analogues
emerge for wayland.

( intel-gpu-tools for example have neither GUI, or really X specific
behaviour aside from its gpu-overlay )
> 
> In which case, keeping the "legacy" x11-* names for such x-specific
> apps, the better to eventually deprecate, mask, and send off to the
> user-maintained "X-sunset" overlay, may make the most sense and will
> almost certainly be less trouble.
> 
> And where there is a port, as presumably there is or will be for
> many of the x11-libs, does it make sense to keep separate x11-*
> and wayland-* categories where they differ, or throw them all together
> in a heap?

Right, there's going to be plenty of examples of things that aren't
portable, and will need to stay in perpetuity in x11-* . x11-drivers
are probably a good example. Though I'm in no hurry to deprecate X11,
wayland will take even longer than systemd for me to go "Ok, yes, now
we should switch everyone to this"

> Meanwhile, the objection to "desktop-*" is that it may well look about
> as relevant in a few years as "mainframe-*" would look today, due to
> mobile, wearables, and possibly ultimately injectibles.
> 
> > IDK.
> > 
> > I'm not committed to anything I've said here, just food for
> > thought.  
> 
> Same here.  My biggest concern is simply avoiding, if possible,
> setting up new categories now, only to have to redo them in 2-5 when
> hindsight makes them look stupid.  It may not be possible, but to the
> extent it is...  Other than that, I've no particular shed color
> preference, other than don't make it 50 characters long or something
> so exotic we have to refer to it as "the category formerly known as
> x11-*." =:^)
> 

Yeah. At this point there's not much value in a switch. And I'm not
entirely happy with either "gui-" or "desktop-". "x11-" is, for all its
warts, more useful than either of those still.

I'm tempted to suggest something like "ux-", which conceptually
encompasses GUI/UI/Display concerns, and having an "x" gives a nod to
its legacy as being "x" without it being part of the definition :)

Its also nice to keep the sort ordering reasonably close:

  sys-*
  virtual
  www-*
  x11-*
  xfce-*

Becomes

  sys-*
  ux-*
  virtual
  www-*
  xfce-*

Which should help anyone confused why the category they're looking for
isn't in /usr/portage any more when they throw an `ls` down there.



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[R0b0t1]

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 12:48 AM, Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I'm tempted to suggest something like "ux-", which conceptually
> encompasses GUI/UI/Display concerns, and having an "x" gives a nod to
> its legacy as being "x" without it being part of the definition :)
>

UX is overly broad, as I could, for example, design a CLI user
experience. Nothing says I need to use images or a mouse. There is
also the unrelated concern of mine that UX is a fake term that people
made up so that they could charge consulting fees to people who don't
know any better.

Inasmuch as my membership to this list makes my opinion valid, I think
"desktop-*" is a very good solution. A desktop is a paradigm that some
would say is intrinsically linked to a graphical user interface.
People who use tiling or other experimental window managers might see
a desktop as something a graphical input system can implement, in
which case "gui-*" could be the most technically generic term. I see
no problem with putting programs like `xset` into "gui-tools/*".

There may not be any reason to change, as the distinctions in place
seem to already be quite arbitrary. Having nested package namespaces
might make things better because then you are forced to define the
logical relationships between namespaces in a way that is not open to
as much interpretation.

Respectfully,
     R0b0t1

[gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Duncan]

Kent Fredric posted on Mon, 04 Sep 2017 17:48:40 +1200 as excerpted:

> Right, there's going to be plenty of examples of things that aren't
> portable, and will need to stay in perpetuity in x11-* . x11-drivers
> are probably a good example. Though I'm in no hurry to deprecate X11,
> wayland will take even longer than systemd for me to go "Ok, yes, now
> we should switch everyone to this"

Indeed.  Even after the general gui-provider can be assumed to be wayland 
in much the same was as it has been X for decades now, rootless/nested X 
will be around for many years/decades, for much the same reason that I'm 
still using dosbox to effectively provide "nested DOS" for that single 
legacy/proprietary game[1] I still play somewhat frequently.  Some 
things, in particular X-based proprietary apps such as but not limited to 
games, are unlikely to ever be ported, so those continuing to find a use 
for them will continue to have a use for X, almost certainly eventually 
in nested and ultimately emulated form, much as I do with that game and 
dosbox.

> Yeah. At this point there's not much value in a switch. And I'm not
> entirely happy with either "gui-" or "desktop-". "x11-" is, for all its
> warts, more useful than either of those still.
> 
> I'm tempted to suggest something like "ux-", which conceptually
> encompasses GUI/UI/Display concerns, and having an "x" gives a nod to
> its legacy as being "x" without it being part of the definition :)

I actually really like the ux-* idea.  So much so I wish I'd thought of 
it. =:^)  It doesn't come across as nearly as "tired and worn out" as 
"gui-*" does, here (tho I already see a reply from someone else with the 
opposite reaction, favoring desktop-* over ux-*).

---
[1] Dosbox game: Master of Orion, original, (c) 1993 updated copy.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[R0b0t1]

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 6:12 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> Indeed.  Even after the general gui-provider can be assumed to be wayland
> in much the same was as it has been X for decades now, rootless/nested X
> will be around for many years/decades, for much the same reason that I'm
> still using dosbox to effectively provide "nested DOS" for that single
> legacy/proprietary game[1] I still play somewhat frequently.  Some
> things, in particular X-based proprietary apps such as but not limited to
> games, are unlikely to ever be ported, so those continuing to find a use
> for them will continue to have a use for X, almost certainly eventually
> in nested and ultimately emulated form, much as I do with that game and
> dosbox.
>

You are likely right. There are contractors with stories of the US
Government running mission critical infrastructure on servers which
emulate an older computer, which in turn is emulating an even older
computer.

> I actually really like the ux-* idea.  So much so I wish I'd thought of
> it. =:^)  It doesn't come across as nearly as "tired and worn out" as
> "gui-*" does, here (tho I already see a reply from someone else with the
> opposite reaction, favoring desktop-* over ux-*).
>

My apologies, sir, for making myself known; please understand it was
never my intention to be a nuisance. I simply send things to this list
so that I can feel like I am doing something. Up until now I had not
been sure my messages were readable.

us·er ex·pe·ri·ence
noun: user experience; plural noun: user experiences
    the overall experience of a person using a product such as a
website or computer application, especially in terms of how easy or
pleasing it is to use.

From this definition, I see no connection to anything graphical. To
the extent that words have meaning I think the selection of "ux-*"
would be a mistake.

Respectfully,
     R0b0t1

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1268 bytes --]

On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 12:27:35 -0500
R0b0t1 <r030t1@gmail.com> wrote:

> Up until now I had not been sure my messages were readable.

Take it as a compliment, at least 1 of the possible warnock[1] reasons
are favourable :)

> us·er ex·pe·ri·ence
> noun: user experience; plural noun: user experiences
>     the overall experience of a person using a product such as a
> website or computer application, especially in terms of how easy or
> pleasing it is to use.
> 
> From this definition, I see no connection to anything graphical. To
> the extent that words have meaning I think the selection of "ux-*"
> would be a mistake.
> 
> Respectfully,
>      R0b0t1

Yeah. Prescriptively you are right. 

"UX" is not "A thing", it is not a piece of software, or even a
category of software.

"UX" is something software *produces*

In truth, it was much more about the "X" in the name as a minor
feature, because well, this is geekery, and we do things like this. :)

For instance, git master for perl is called "blead" ...

And GNU's Not Unix. 

But yes, I do agree its not ideal still. But I'll try to think of other
terms that can sneak an "x" into them ;)

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warnock%27s_dilemma#Original_description

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 800 bytes --]

The points made about both ux- and gui- make sense. As does using
something like desktop- which could be confusing for mobile, wearable,
or other stuff with graphics. Not sure if length is of concern.

One that is in use now that has not come up is gfx. That is used now
for like media-gfx. Not sure if it would be confusing to have its own
category

gfx-libs
gfx-tools
gfx-apps

Though gfx and gui are pretty much the same. Given that there is a
wikipedia page for GUI. gui-* may be the most clear to all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphical_user_interface

Maybe just UI but that maybe to generic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_interface

The wikipedia page on UX would make it not suitable
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_experience

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 716 bytes --]

On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:16:46 -0400
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:

> Maybe just UI but that maybe to generic.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_interface

As a side question, what does "xui" mean in this world?

I went googling and all I could find was "X User Interface"

And all I could find there is that's "A user interface to the X Windows
System"

Are we allowed to consider Wayland and X11 are both "X Windows Systems"
providing "X User Interfaces", despite the underlying protocols being
different?

Most of my search results returned "Mac OSX User Interface", so its not
all bad.

Maybe not a solution in itself, but we're in the right side of the
universe now.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Duncan]

R0b0t1 posted on Mon, 04 Sep 2017 12:27:35 -0500 as excerpted:

>> I actually really like the ux-* idea.  So much so I wish I'd thought of
>> it. =:^)  It doesn't come across as nearly as "tired and worn out" as
>> "gui-*" does, here (tho I already see a reply from someone else with
>> the opposite reaction, favoring desktop-* over ux-*).
>>
> My apologies, sir, for making myself known; please understand it was
> never my intention to be a nuisance.

No need to apologize for differing views. =:^)

FWIW, I too am simply a gentoo user (note the lack of gentoo address), 
tho I've been a gentooer for nearing a decade and a half now (well, since 
early 2004, so "nearing" true, but not quite there yet), and have been 
following the dev list since I first started, so have a rather longer and 
more mature perspective than some.

Meanwhile, it's certainly nice to see messages with more respect than may 
sometimes be seen in this list.  Thanks.  But don't be afraid to post 
your user's opinion just because it differs from someone else's opinion.  
Your opinion is valuable too, even if it's mine it differs with! =:^)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

[gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Duncan]

Kent Fredric posted on Tue, 05 Sep 2017 07:29:42 +1200 as excerpted:

> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:16:46 -0400 "William L. Thomson Jr."
> <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
> 
>> Maybe just UI but that maybe to generic.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_interface
> 
> As a side question, what does "xui" mean in this world?
> 
> I went googling and all I could find was "X User Interface"
> 
> And all I could find there is that's "A user interface to the X Windows
> System"
> 
> Are we allowed to consider Wayland and X11 are both "X Windows Systems"
> providing "X User Interfaces", despite the underlying protocols being
> different?

Warnock agree?

(Tho posting makes it no longer warnock.)  Thanks for the warnock 
reference[1], BTW.  I knew of the problem but had no name for it, so you 
broadened my vocabulary in a very useful way. =:^)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warnock%27s_dilemma

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Gordon Pettey]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 811 bytes --]

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:

> R0b0t1 posted on Mon, 04 Sep 2017 12:27:35 -0500 as excerpted:
>
> >> I actually really like the ux-* idea.  So much so I wish I'd thought of
> >> it. =:^)  It doesn't come across as nearly as "tired and worn out" as
> >> "gui-*" does, here (tho I already see a reply from someone else with
> >> the opposite reaction, favoring desktop-* over ux-*).
>

Pedants will note that UI (user interface) and UX (user experience) are
different things and for the described purpose of package categories,
neither one fits, at all.

ui-apps: Don't all "apps" have UIs, whether X11, Wayland, ncurses, slang,
plain text, or etc.?
ux-apps: What does this even mean? UX refers to the way a user interacts
with an application, not the application itself.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1245 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Alan McKinnon]

On 05/09/2017 00:15, Duncan wrote:
> Kent Fredric posted on Tue, 05 Sep 2017 07:29:42 +1200 as excerpted:
> 
>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:16:46 -0400 "William L. Thomson Jr."
>> <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Maybe just UI but that maybe to generic.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_interface
>>
>> As a side question, what does "xui" mean in this world?
>>
>> I went googling and all I could find was "X User Interface"
>>
>> And all I could find there is that's "A user interface to the X Windows
>> System"
>>
>> Are we allowed to consider Wayland and X11 are both "X Windows Systems"
>> providing "X User Interfaces", despite the underlying protocols being
>> different?
> 
> Warnock agree?
> 
> (Tho posting makes it no longer warnock.)  Thanks for the warnock 
> reference[1], BTW.  I knew of the problem but had no name for it, so you 
> broadened my vocabulary in a very useful way. =:^)
> 
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warnock%27s_dilemma
> 

"xui" is a nice descriptive name and gets the point across in a
reasonably unambiguous way. wayland is not X11, but it comes from a
desire to do what X11 does without X11's problems.

There might be a smallish snag with educating users what "xui" means as
the name is not in common use.

"display-server" also serves as that is what wayland and X11 have in
common. It's a long unwieldy name and the "-" might trip over hidden
naming assumptions.

Given a vote, I'd vote for "xui".
Second choice is to stick with "x11-" as it will take a very long time
for all users to forget what x11 is and how wayland relates

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 819 bytes --]

On Tue, 5 Sep 2017 16:59:39 +0200
Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:

> "xui" is a nice descriptive name and gets the point across in a
> reasonably unambiguous way. wayland is not X11, but it comes from a
> desire to do what X11 does without X11's problems.

And I have a few other perks of xui too.

we could in a pinch pretend it means "x/ui", if people aren't
comfortable with considering "Wayland" to be "An X". Then "X/UI" would
be "X, and things like it"

The wiki page for "X Windows System"[1] also had some interesting notes.

> X Consortium release manager Matt Landau stating in 1993, "There is
> no such thing as 'X Windows' or 'X Window', despite the repeated
> misuse of the forms by the trade rags"

Neat.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Window_System#Nomenclature

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Categories for GUI stuff x11 and wayland

[William L. Thomson Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1759 bytes --]

On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 14:01:08 -0400
"William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@o-sinc.com> wrote:

> This is more food for thought to start a discussion on new category
> names. With Wayland becoming more of a reality every day. I think some
> of the x11-* categories may need to change. Stuff in there may not be
> bound to X and can run on Wayland or X.
> 
> Examples
> x11-libs/gtk+
> x11-terms/terminology
> 
> Not sure what better "universal" category names would be. But seems it
> maybe time for a discussion on such and some new categories and
> package moves. Given thus stuff can run under X or Wayland. Not sure
> x11 makes sense anymore.

One thing I forgot to mention, the x11-* would not go away just shrink.

General stuff that is for say X11 or Wayland would go into the "new"
categories. Anything that is X specific, like xorg, drivers, xephyr, etc
would remain in the location and category it presently resides.

This would reduce the amount of package moves, but still would be fair
amount. With some being pretty major like moving GTK+. EFL ended up in
dev-libs, and I am not sure if that is the proper location, though it
does cross many categories. GTK+ and  FLTK are in x11-libs. I think EFL
ended up in dev-libs due to Wayland situation.

P.S.
I myself am not super excited about wayland. I see reliving a lot of
the problems of the past. Not to mention wayland supporting what X can
do now, today. Many things still in the works for most any
supporting Wayland, dual display, different resolutions etc. I gave it
a nickname  "Waitland" as you have to WAIT for wayland to support this
or that.... Either way it seems inevitable... Even if years off from
being the daily driver.

-- 
William L. Thomson Jr.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]