Regarding the GNOME vs. MATE etc., please read this recent post from Vincent: http://www.vuntz.net/journal/post/2012/11/21/No-fallback-mode-in-GNOME-3.8%2C-future-of-gnome-panel If people (the MATE people?) step in and maintain & adjust the gnome-panel, we won't have any problem for Jessie. I will just wait, since this will all be solved in a nice way :) Cheers, Matthias
2012/11/21 John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de>: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 02:15:00PM +0100, Josselin Mouette wrote: > >> > Don't get me wrong most of them could probably "get along" >> > with the fallback mode after some degree of tweaking, but they would >> > miss A LOT! Some examples? In no particular order: The complete >> > infrastructure under gnome-fallback is a *completely* *different* horse. >> > Some would say it is not even a horse, it is rather a mule! That "mule" >> > behaves utterly different when it comes to several aspects. >> >> You need to be more specific because despite being one of the >> maintainers I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. > > Well, I can confirm Michael's observations. We're running Debian > Squeeze at a physics department of a large German university. > > Most users are using GNOME2. We have upgraded some of the machines to > Wheezy already to be able to test Wheezy before deployment. And many > users were actually confused after being confronted with GNOME3. Their > biggest disturbances were the missing desktop icons and the missing > GNOME menu. It's not something one should underestimate, the average > joe user is rather unflexible and lazy (and maybe stupid). But it's > not their fault, they just want to get their work done and not mess > around with the user interface. > >> >> > The panel (no free arranging of applets / starters; >> >> This is by design. Please point me to a case where the new layout >> mechanism doesn’t answer *real* user needs. OTOH being finally free of >> absolute positioning means the end of the awful bugs when resizing the >> screen or when applets change their size. > > Some people want their panel at the bottom, some want it on the sides, > some want it on the top. Please do never tell people how to customize > their desktop because it is something absolutely subjective and > personal. That's why customization exists in the first place. > >> > not all applets ported; >> >> Port them. I’ve done it for a pair of them, it is really simple. > > Why reinvent the wheel when we have everything perfectly there? It's > not that we gain something by porting everything to GNOME3 when stuff > is working in GNOME2/MATE. > > Also, the whole extension zoo in GNOME3 is not really an alternative > because the extensions aren't even compatible between different GNOME3 > minor versions which is a HUGE disadvantage. > >> > simple right-click does not work anymore, alt or even alt+super+click >> > is needed now; >> >> Obviously you haven’t had to manage a help desk where you get calls from >> people who have accidentally removed their notification area or their >> window list with a wrongly placed right click. > > Again, I can confirm that. > >> > menus arranged in a completely different and un-logical >> > fashion;...). >> >> Wut? > > I think the new GNOME Control Center is actually horrible. It was much > more logical with GNOME2. It's not a good design when I have to search > where an option is hidden. > >> > No language / keyboard settings in GDM anymore (Oops, you >> > speak a different language with a different keyboard layout then the >> > system default? Hope you did not use any fancy symbols for your password >> > then!). >> >> This one, I agree, is a real problem. I don’t like how upstream moved >> regional settings to the control center. Patches that reintroduce >> keyboard selection in GDM in a correct fashion will be accepted. > > Actually, this is one of the most fundamental idiotic changes in > GNOME3. They automatically assume that everyone is using GNOME3 and > completely ignore the fact that many people actually use different > desktops or window managers, so they need to be able to select their > language *before* login. > > And lightdm isn't helping in any way because language setting and last > session restore are actually broken (see [1] and [2]). > >> > The control-center, a lot of stuff is missing. Gone are the days >> > you can keep your laptop running when closing the lid. Want to prohibit >> > display blanking? Sorry, gone too. >> >> If you want very specific settings you can use gsettings to set those >> defaults. You are not talking of basic use cases that a random user with >> no understanding of a command line would need. > > Again, this is something highly subjective and most users actually > prefer having *more* customizability, not less. Whenever you say > "Users don't need it", you actually mean "I don't need it". > >> > That list goes on and on (ask the web for a more comprehensive list) >> >> Yeeehaw, just “ask the web”. What could go wrong with that? Haven’t you >> noticed how asking the web will always lead to the same answer: any >> change will be deemed absolutely horrible and destructive. > > No, that's not true. But developers *should* listen to the people who > are actually using the software. Changes are ok, but not if these > changes mean taking features away or making software more > uncomfortable to use. > > Just look at Microsoft and their disaster with Windows 8 and you will > realize what will happen when you don't listen your users: The sales > figures for Windows 8 are so low that Microsoft is too embarrassed to > disclose them. > > People who were defending Microsoft's decision always came up with the > same argument that users are too lazy to accept changes which is an > unfair accusation. Changes and improvements are always good (I love > stuff like systemd or Pulse-Audio, for example). But most changes from > GNOME2 to GNOME3 are not an improvement, they made things worse. > >> > and some of those shortcomings can be >> > tweaked away, which means effort and grief in varying degree. In short, >> > gnome3-fallback just looks at the upper surface almost like gnome2 did, >> > but is, behaves, works completely different. >> >> Indeed, it works much better. It is a fallback for GNOME3, not just >> GNOME2 with sed s/gnome/mate/ so it was a bit more work, but certainly >> worth it. > > Could you elaborate on this, please? Because I do not think at all > that GNOME fallback is a viable alternative to GNOME2/MATE and it was > never intended to. There is a reason why it is called "fallback mode" > and not just GNOME3 2D. The fallback mode was always just a temporary > solution until software rendering was ready and that's the reason why > it is now being dropped by upstream for the next release. > >> > I kind of insist it being in jessie ;) And yes, that makes another good >> > point why the gnome3-fallback just can't feel like the real thing. It is >> > supposed to be for those users that 1.) can't use the shell as no 3D >> > acceleration available 2.) absolutely can't or don't want to work with a >> > new and different desktop-paradigm, with accepted pain and grief in >> > varying detail... >> >> So what you suggest for jessie is, after users having gone through the >> “pain” of moving from GNOME2 to GNOME 3 classic, to go back to GNOME2 >> with GTK2, GConf (sorry, MateConf) and almost everything looking like a >> squeeze desktop? > > Most Debian users haven't gone through the pain of change yet, they're > still running GNOME2 with Squeeze. And please, don't call it "GNOME3 > classic", there is no such thing. It's a fallback mode, an ugly one. > > Cheers, > > Adrian > >> [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=679386 >> [2] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=683662 > > -- > .''`. John Paul Adrian Glaubitz > : :' : Debian Developer - glaub...@debian.org > `. `' Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaub...@physik.fu-berlin.de > `- GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546 0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913 > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org > Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20121121142138.gb4...@physik.fu-berlin.de > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caknhny_a2zsl2uzlna_ure-jt9hndp4voc5+onp2bhetcjh...@mail.gmail.com
