Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Ubuntu Desktop (http://www.linux-archive.org/ubuntu-desktop/)
-   -   GNOME plans review (http://www.linux-archive.org/ubuntu-desktop/657573-gnome-plans-review.html)

Sebastien Bacher 04-19-2012 10:38 AM

GNOME plans review
 
Le 19/04/2012 12:28, Sebastien Bacher a écrit :
- whatever other topics you guys come with ;-)


We should probably have a discussion about gnome-control-center with
design, our delta there and the strategy going forward to maintain it.
We either need to work with upstream and get stuff merged back there
even if that's not exactly what our design team wanted or to decide to
maintain our forked ubuntu-control-center version with the additional
cost that represents.


Not sure if that should have its own session though...

Sebastien Bacher

--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Michael Hall 04-19-2012 12:30 PM

GNOME plans review
 
On 04/19/2012 06:28 AM, Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> - our delta with upstream and Debian and how we could lower it? mpt
> suggested that "launchpad-integration" items are quite "geeky", they
> also create most of our diff over Debian and extra work and don't really
> "scale" since they require sources patching, maybe it's time to
> discussion dropping that?

Assuming "launchpad-integration" means the added menu items, this could
possibly be added at runtime by the global menu, rather than patching
the app source.

Michael Hall
mhall119@ubuntu.com

--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Sebastien Bacher 10-15-2012 05:50 PM

GNOME plans review
 
Hey,

That's a "classic", we usually review our plans for GNOME for the next
cycle.


That's going to be a controversial topic but I want to suggest we stay
on stable GNOME this cycle, the reasons are (in random order):


- tracking unstable GNOME is taking lot of resources that we don't
invest in our desktop (packaging a new stack every 3 weeks, dealing with
transitions, regressions, etc)


- our desktop is quite less "stock GNOME" than it used to be, which
means we have extra integration work to do and it's less trivial to do
those "on the way" during the cycle


- GNOME unstable series and Ubuntu "working every day" are hard to
conciliate goals


- GNOME is not communicating early enough on what is coming for us to
discuss next cycle at UDS (see nautilus 3.6 in quantal)


- GNOME is shipping stables with transitions half done (see gstreamer
1.0 this cycle) which is not something we want in Ubuntu


- our "feedback loop" with GNOME is not really working nowadays, they
don't have time to look at most bugs and we hit regressions and sit on
them until somebody on our side has time to look at them, which means
neither GNOME or us benefits much from tracking unstable GNOME...



On the con side though:

- it gives us less opportunity to work with upstream on resolving issues

- we don't get early feedback on what is happening

- the new version of libraries might have APIs our app writers might
want to use



Comments?

Seb

--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Sebastien Bacher 10-15-2012 05:55 PM

GNOME plans review
 
Le 15/10/2012 19:50, Sebastien Bacher a écrit :
- the new version of libraries might have APIs our app writers might
want to use


On that I would note that we should keep a ppa for the unstable serie
packages, open to contributions. Most app writer do want to target users
of stable users out there anyway and will probably not want to jump on
using the latest apis added.


I've to say I'm not convinced we shouldn't update the libraries yet,
they should be ok to track though they are also the elements the most
likely to create issues for other people working on the distribution
(think ftbfses introduced by gtk deprecations).


One element to think about also is how that would impact the GNOME remix
if the plan there is not ship the latest GNOME...


Cheers,
Sebastien Bacher

--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Michael Terry 10-15-2012 06:17 PM

GNOME plans review
 
I'm a fan of this for quality reasons.

Shipping very latest GNOME used to give Ubuntu a cutting edge feel, but
nowadays, shiny new Ubuntu features tend to come from Unity and
friends. The interesting new user-facing changes that GNOME brings are
(mostly) in Shell. So I don't think the default Ubuntu image would lose
much in terms of "staying relevant" by sticking to stable GNOME releases.


That said, the GNOME Remix would have a much harder time feeling cutting
edge.


-mt

On 15/10/12 13:50, Sebastien Bacher wrote:

Hey,

That's a "classic", we usually review our plans for GNOME for the next
cycle.


That's going to be a controversial topic but I want to suggest we stay
on stable GNOME this cycle, the reasons are (in random order):


- tracking unstable GNOME is taking lot of resources that we don't
invest in our desktop (packaging a new stack every 3 weeks, dealing
with transitions, regressions, etc)


- our desktop is quite less "stock GNOME" than it used to be, which
means we have extra integration work to do and it's less trivial to do
those "on the way" during the cycle


- GNOME unstable series and Ubuntu "working every day" are hard to
conciliate goals


- GNOME is not communicating early enough on what is coming for us to
discuss next cycle at UDS (see nautilus 3.6 in quantal)


- GNOME is shipping stables with transitions half done (see gstreamer
1.0 this cycle) which is not something we want in Ubuntu


- our "feedback loop" with GNOME is not really working nowadays, they
don't have time to look at most bugs and we hit regressions and sit on
them until somebody on our side has time to look at them, which means
neither GNOME or us benefits much from tracking unstable GNOME...



On the con side though:

- it gives us less opportunity to work with upstream on resolving issues

- we don't get early feedback on what is happening

- the new version of libraries might have APIs our app writers might
want to use



Comments?

Seb




--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop

Ma Xiaojun 10-16-2012 04:32 AM

GNOME plans review
 
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Jeremy Bicha <jbicha@ubuntu.com> wrote:
> The other big example this cycle is ibus. GNOME 3.6 doesn't work
> properly without a not-released-as-stable version of ibus.
> http://pad.lv/1045914
Have you contacted with IBus upstream?
Developers of IBus are mostly using Fedora, which ships 1.4.99 since Fedora 17.
We all know that IBus 1.4 on Unity is broken.
But in fact IBus 1.4 on GNOME 3.4 (Precise) is not much better, the
tray icon constantly flashes.
I've been using a PPA for patched ibus-gjs for one of my 12.04 box.
Official ibus-gjs doesn't work on precise, probably due to IBus version reason.
The point is, you've been far behind on IBus stuff for long.

--
ubuntu-desktop mailing list
ubuntu-desktop@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:20 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.