Lionel Le Folgoc wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> (I stripped some parts to reduce the size of the mail
>
> On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 03:41:03PM +0200, Pasi Lallinaho wrote:
>> Charlie Kravetz wrote:
>>> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 09:05:45 +0100
>>> Steve Dodier <sidnioulz@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> Both Synaptic and gnome-app-install are being replaced by the Software
>>>> Centre (not sure if it's the exact name). This new app brings a few
>>>> dependencies but it's likely that removing gnome-app-install and synaptic
>>>> will make enough room on the CD for it.
>>>> As long as it doesn't pull mono and gnome* I'm all for giving the new app a
>>>> try.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we could ask the desktop team what they think will be ready for Lucid
>>>> in the software centre, and whether they think they'll be able to replace
>>>> synaptic in this release.
>
> There is enough room on the livecd anyway. I think that we *have to*
> switch to software-center for lucid, because gnome-app-install has
> already been demoted from main to universe in karmic (which means that
> Canonical folks don't want to support it anymore, and since they were
> the only ones touching it…).
>
>>>>> 2) gnome-system-monitor
>>>>>
>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>> For now, I don't think the Xfce components can deliver the same amount
>>>>> of features and, regretfully, quality. I also like htop, but we can't
>>>>> consider it as the main application for system monitoring, as it's CLI
>>>>> and many people fear command line.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Gnome system monitor monitors system load, network load, ram and swap usage,
>>>> and HDD usage. It may be doing too much for one's needs, but when you want
>>>> to know if some app is using all of your bandwidth, it's cool to can check
>>>> in the system monitor without having to go in command line.
>>>>
>>>> While xftaskmanager may be more appropriate for your needs,
>>>> gnome-system-monitor is in my opinion better for end users.
>>>>
>
> We have already xfce4-cpugraph-plugin, xfce4-systemload-plugin,
> xfce4-netload-plugin and xfce4-taskmanager. The fact that gnome devs
> decided to make a single program (gnome-system-monitor) for that doesn't
> imply that we should blindly do the same.
>
> (Anyway, I've no strong opinion on this, I think htop is the best one.
> :P)
>
>>>>>> 3) Totem
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>> I can name only one player that also uses a decent backend and that is
>>>> written with a proper GTK+ GUI. It's Parole, and I'm looking forward to it,
>>>> but considering that it's rather new, we can't expect it to be as integrated
>>>> in the desktop yet (for instance, does it already manage to find missing
>>>> codecs for the user?).
>>>>
>>>> Whats the point of a player with tons of features like audacity, mplayer or
>>>> vlc if it crashes miserably when you launch a file or if the GUI is
>>>> difficult to use because of some particular skin, or very debatable keyboard
>>>> shortcut choices? I'm all for keeping Totem for the LTS, and testing Parole
>>>> from the very beginning of Lucid+1's release cycle (ie. before alpha 1, and
>>>> until beta 1 at least, so we can report bugs to Ali and see what's missing
>>>> from the Xubuntu point of view).
>
> The issue with mplayer, vlc, or any ffmpeg related player, is that they
> can't be shipped on a live cd (decision of the TB).
>
> About the missing codecs, I think any gstreamer-based player will be
> handled by gnome-codec-install without problem (this is the case for
> totem currently, so it might work fine for parole as well).
>
>>>> [snip]
>>> I do NOT want to look for a firefox replacement and the issues it will
>>> bring into an LTS release. That belongs in the regular release, perhaps
>>> lucid +1. Lucid as an LTS needs to be as solid as we can make it. It is
>>> not the release to test what we can in, but rather, the release to fix
>>> what we can in.
>>>
>> I have to agree with Charlie here. Changing the default browser to
>> something not Firefox in an LTS release would really make our users mad,
>> even if it was working. And at this time, I'm not sure if midori is even
>> working fairly enough.
>
> Indeed, there are lots of possible changes:
> 1/ xfce 4.6 -> 4.8
> 2/ brasero -> xfburn
> 3/ totem -> parole
> 4/ gnome-system-monitor -> xfce4-taskmanager, xfce4-*-plugin
> 5/ gnome-app-install -> software-center
> 6/ gnome-screensaver -> xscreensaver
> 7/ firefox -> midori
>
> As lucid is a LTS, I think we should focus on the most "safe" ones: 5/
> and 6/. Keeping gnome-screensaver is dangerous (who knows what stupid
> ideas will gnome developers have for lucid? -- currently in karmic,
> there's no screen locking without gnome-session); I consider
> gnome-app-install as "unmaintained upstream", so we shouldn't keep it
> either.
>
> Cheers,
> Lionel
>
>

Software Center seems OKAY, as long as it's easily removed (hehe) - but
it seems to suffer from the same issues as gnome-app-install in that it
only shows a small percentage of what is in the repositories.

I also think it's a shame that gnome-app-install made it into Xubuntu
9.10 as it ships with a fairly major bug (no icons displayed for the
categories).

- J

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

2009/12/5 J. Anthony Limon <j@flippo.net>

Lionel Le Folgoc wrote:

> Hi there,

>

> (I stripped some parts to reduce the size of the mail

>

> On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 03:41:03PM +0200, Pasi Lallinaho wrote:

>> Charlie Kravetz wrote:

>>> On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 09:05:45 +0100

>>> Steve Dodier <sidnioulz@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>

>>> [snip]

>>>

>>>> Both Synaptic and gnome-app-install are being replaced by the Software

>>>> Centre (not sure if it's the exact name). This new app brings a few

>>>> dependencies but it's likely that removing gnome-app-install and synaptic

>>>> will make enough room on the CD for it.

>>>> As long as it doesn't pull mono and gnome* I'm all for giving the new app a

>>>> try.

>>>>

>>>> Maybe we could ask the desktop team what they think will be ready for Lucid

>>>> in the software centre, and whether they think they'll be able to replace

>>>> synaptic in this release.

>

> There is enough room on the livecd anyway. I think that we *have to*

> switch to software-center for lucid, because gnome-app-install has

> already been demoted from main to universe in karmic (which means that

> Canonical folks don't want to support it anymore, and since they were

> the only ones touching it…).

>

>>>>> 2) gnome-system-monitor

>>>>>

>>>>>> [snip]

>>>>>>

>>>>> For now, I don't think the Xfce components can deliver the same amount

>>>>> of features and, regretfully, quality. I also like htop, but we can't

>>>>> consider it as the main application for system monitoring, as it's CLI

>>>>> and many people fear command line.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>> Gnome system monitor monitors system load, network load, ram and swap usage,

>>>> and HDD usage. It may be doing too much for one's needs, but when you want

>>>> to know if some app is using all of your bandwidth, it's cool to can check

>>>> in the system monitor without having to go in command line.

>>>>

>>>> While xftaskmanager may be more appropriate for your needs,

>>>> gnome-system-monitor is in my opinion better for end users.

>>>>

>

> We have already xfce4-cpugraph-plugin, xfce4-systemload-plugin,

> xfce4-netload-plugin and xfce4-taskmanager. The fact that gnome devs

> decided to make a single program (gnome-system-monitor) for that doesn't

> imply that we should blindly do the same.

>

> (Anyway, I've no strong opinion on this, I think htop is the best one.

> :P)

>

>>>>>> 3) Totem

>>>>>>

>>>>>> [snip]

>>>>>>

>>>> I can name only one player that also uses a decent backend and that is

>>>> written with a proper GTK+ GUI. It's Parole, and I'm looking forward to it,

>>>> but considering that it's rather new, we can't expect it to be as integrated

>>>> in the desktop yet (for instance, does it already manage to find missing

>>>> codecs for the user?).

>>>>

>>>> Whats the point of a player with tons of features like audacity, mplayer or

>>>> vlc if it crashes miserably when you launch a file or if the GUI is

>>>> difficult to use because of some particular skin, or very debatable keyboard

>>>> shortcut choices? I'm all for keeping Totem for the LTS, and testing Parole

>>>> from the very beginning of Lucid+1's release cycle (ie. before alpha 1, and

>>>> until beta 1 at least, so we can report bugs to Ali and see what's missing

>>>> from the Xubuntu point of view).

>

> The issue with mplayer, vlc, or any ffmpeg related player, is that they

> can't be shipped on a live cd (decision of the TB).

>

> About the missing codecs, I think any gstreamer-based player will be

> handled by gnome-codec-install without problem (this is the case for

> totem currently, so it might work fine for parole as well).

>

>>>> Â*[snip]

>>> I do NOT want to look for a firefox replacement and the issues it will

>>> bring into an LTS release. That belongs in the regular release, perhaps

>>> lucid +1. Lucid as an LTS needs to be as solid as we can make it. It is

>>> not the release to test what we can in, but rather, the release to fix

>>> what we can in.

>>>

>> I have to agree with Charlie here. Changing the default browser to

>> something not Firefox in an LTS release would really make our users mad,

>> even if it was working. And at this time, I'm not sure if midori is even

>> working fairly enough.

>

> Indeed, there are lots of possible changes:

> 1/ xfce 4.6 -> 4.8

> 2/ brasero -> xfburn

> 3/ totem -> parole

> 4/ gnome-system-monitor -> xfce4-taskmanager, xfce4-*-plugin

> 5/ gnome-app-install -> software-center

> 6/ gnome-screensaver -> xscreensaver

> 7/ firefox -> midori

>

> As lucid is a LTS, I think we should focus on the most "safe" ones: 5/

> and 6/. Keeping gnome-screensaver is dangerous (who knows what stupid

> ideas will gnome developers have for lucid? -- currently in karmic,

> there's no screen locking without gnome-session); I consider

> gnome-app-install as "unmaintained upstream", so we shouldn't keep it

> either.

>
Agree with you, Lionel. And this leaves lot of room for working on upstream.

Â*

> Cheers,

> Lionel

>

>



Software Center seems OKAY, as long as it's easily removed (hehe) - but

it seems to suffer from the same issues as gnome-app-install in that it

only shows a small percentage of what is in the repositories.



I also think it's a shame that gnome-app-install made it into Xubuntu

9.10 as it ships with a fairly major bug (no icons displayed for the

categories).
That's clearly due to the lack of testers: noone used gnome-app-install, so noone saw the bug.

--
Steve Dodier
Student at École Nationale Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Bourges

Free Software Developer
OpenPGP : 1B6B1670

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

Andrew Stormont wrote:
> Also, nobody has any intentions of
>
> adopting Pulse Audio into the Xubuntu system, right?
>
>
> I've always considered that a feature
>

Yeah, I have as well.. I've yet to see a situation where Pulse has
helped.. I fully support keeping Pulse out of Xubuntu.

- J

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

On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 5:25 AM, Pasi Lallinaho <open@knome.fi> wrote:
> J. Anthony Limon wrote:
>> Hi team,

>> On my system I use a mixture of xfce4-taskmanager and htop, I'm not sure
>> if this would be satisfactory on the majority of people's desktops but I
>> * am of the opinion that GSM has to go.

I was not aware of xfce4-taskmanager. Thanks. I configured CPU Graph
panel plugin to use it. Sad that you can't set the plugin's "Width" to
zero, BTW.

> Agree. There is loads of *decent* video player alternatives. I've never
> liked Totem. It sounds it is from the stone-age. I'd really like to see
> something else already in Lucid.

Totem mozilla plugin works pretty well. It is easy to set it to full
screen mode. Even katsomo.fi works with it, not with firefox, but with
midori. Random access seems to be impossible in linux, still

> My personal experience is that PA is only bringing in problems, but if
> we can get those sorted out, I can live with it. I hear PA can do
> wonderful things once it works.

I have tried PA when I used Ubuntu, and I could not make 2nd analog
line out of my sound card work with it. Both line outs have always
worked in Xubuntu (since 2006 when I started using it).

> We probably want to ship Exaile as our default media player for Lucid
> also, but I want to finger at the really bad quality of media players in
> general in Karmic. Most of them do not work for me at all (read: they
> crash constantly or leak into memory).

I haven't seen such crashes. Exaile is the first music player by which
I find it easy to set up a collection and easy to use generally. But
it is so young, there is some unresponsiveness.

Alsaplayer is more mature and has nice controls such as arbitrary
playback speed between -400% and 400%, but it does not have a proper
collection management, AFAIK.

As for remote control of such players, Lirc stopped working at all
with my remote control device in Karmic due to its kernel.

--
http://www.iki.fi/8/

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

On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Lionel Le Folgoc <mrpouit@ubuntu.com> wrote:


Hi there,



(I stripped some parts to reduce the size of the mail



On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 03:41:03PM +0200, Pasi Lallinaho wrote:

> Charlie Kravetz wrote:

> > On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 09:05:45 +0100

> > Steve Dodier <sidnioulz@gmail.com> wrote:

> >

> > [snip]

> >

> >> Both Synaptic and gnome-app-install are being replaced by the Software

> >> Centre (not sure if it's the exact name). This new app brings a few

> >> dependencies but it's likely that removing gnome-app-install and synaptic

> >> will make enough room on the CD for it.

> >> As long as it doesn't pull mono and gnome* I'm all for giving the new app a

> >> try.

> >>

> >> Maybe we could ask the desktop team what they think will be ready for Lucid

> >> in the software centre, and whether they think they'll be able to replace

> >> synaptic in this release.



There is enough room on the livecd anyway. I think that we *have to*

switch to software-center for lucid, because gnome-app-install has

already been demoted from main to universe in karmic (which means that

Canonical folks don't want to support it anymore, and since they were

the only ones touching it…).

Let me chime in here: I *did* use gnome-app-install. And it was kind of my fault for not reporting the missing icons - I did see it, and notice it, but didn't really consciously do so. So I didn't report the bug. Has anybody reported it now?



Anyway, I also told people to use that, because I found it to be more useful for finding "normal" programs, and less scary (normal names, icons, descriptions etc.). I do hope the Software Center will include support for showing all packages in a sane way, but I suppose we can only await that. Lionel's argument in favour of removing gnome-app-install is valid, though, but I'm afraid to see what the effects will be of Canonical not really taking Xubuntu into account.



As for asking the devs what they think will be ready for Lucid: that's all documented at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SoftwareCenter#Roadmap
Â*




> >>> 2) gnome-system-monitor

> >>>

> >>>> [snip]

> >>>>

> >>> For now, I don't think the Xfce components can deliver the same amount

> >>> of features and, regretfully, quality. I also like htop, but we can't

> >>> consider it as the main application for system monitoring, as it's CLI

> >>> and many people fear command line.

> >>>

> >>>

> >> Gnome system monitor monitors system load, network load, ram and swap usage,

> >> and HDD usage. It may be doing too much for one's needs, but when you want

> >> to know if some app is using all of your bandwidth, it's cool to can check

> >> in the system monitor without having to go in command line.

> >>

> >> While xftaskmanager may be more appropriate for your needs,

> >> gnome-system-monitor is in my opinion better for end users.

> >>



We have already xfce4-cpugraph-plugin, xfce4-systemload-plugin,

xfce4-netload-plugin and xfce4-taskmanager. The fact that gnome devs

decided to make a single program (gnome-system-monitor) for that doesn't

imply that we should blindly do the same.



(Anyway, I've no strong opinion on this, I think htop is the best one.

:P)

xfce4-taskmanager needs some work to be user-friendly, IMHO. Not a very strong opinion on this either, though I'd keep using GSM I think. Of course, it might just happen that the problems get addressed upstream (for either project - are they even maintained?).





> >>>> 3) Totem

> >>>>

> >>>> [snip]

> >>>>

> >> I can name only one player that also uses a decent backend and that is

> >> written with a proper GTK+ GUI. It's Parole, and I'm looking forward to it,

> >> but considering that it's rather new, we can't expect it to be as integrated

> >> in the desktop yet (for instance, does it already manage to find missing

> >> codecs for the user?).

> >>

> >> Whats the point of a player with tons of features like audacity, mplayer or

> >> vlc if it crashes miserably when you launch a file or if the GUI is

> >> difficult to use because of some particular skin, or very debatable keyboard

> >> shortcut choices? I'm all for keeping Totem for the LTS, and testing Parole

> >> from the very beginning of Lucid+1's release cycle (ie. before alpha 1, and

> >> until beta 1 at least, so we can report bugs to Ali and see what's missing

> >> from the Xubuntu point of view).



The issue with mplayer, vlc, or any ffmpeg related player, is that they

can't be shipped on a live cd (decision of the TB).



About the missing codecs, I think any gstreamer-based player will be

handled by gnome-codec-install without problem (this is the case for

totem currently, so it might work fine for parole as well).

This would require someone to make an objective analysis. Meanwhile, I don't really find Totem particularly bothersome, so I would place that low on the priority list of things to do, and also (as said) not something to do for an LTS.


Â*


> >>

> >> Â*[snip]

> >

> > I do NOT want to look for a firefox replacement and the issues it will

> > bring into an LTS release. That belongs in the regular release, perhaps

> > lucid +1. Lucid as an LTS needs to be as solid as we can make it. It is

> > not the release to test what we can in, but rather, the release to fix

> > what we can in.

> >

> I have to agree with Charlie here. Changing the default browser to

> something not Firefox in an LTS release would really make our users mad,

> even if it was working. And at this time, I'm not sure if midori is even

> working fairly enough.



Indeed, there are lots of possible changes:

1/ xfce 4.6 -> 4.8

2/ brasero -> xfburn

3/ totem -> parole

4/ gnome-system-monitor -> xfce4-taskmanager, xfce4-*-plugin

5/ gnome-app-install -> software-center

6/ gnome-screensaver -> xscreensaver

7/ firefox -> midori



As lucid is a LTS, I think we should focus on the most "safe" ones: 5/

and 6/. Keeping gnome-screensaver is dangerous (who knows what stupid

ideas will gnome developers have for lucid? -- currently in karmic,

there's no screen locking without gnome-session); I consider

gnome-app-install as "unmaintained upstream", so we shouldn't keep it

either.

Agreed.
Â*



Cheers,

Lionel



--

Lionel Le Folgoc - https://launchpad.net/~mrpouit

E61E 116D 4BA1 3936 0A33 Â*F61D 65D9 A66E 10E2 969A


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)



iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJLGpPvAAoJEGXZpm4Q4paaBxEP/3wSufL471QlvYBfnWMGEUmj

V7lRZTJ+J1DGkY3tQXMLGuNe7+cXR6epxhmFjVx+FwmIbSzsUe krB8d6cYUaN4Sk

jguJwhFRzE9iYNkNL+EUvVJbHK+d9fEtLCWe3aGMi8cxk++bi8 FdJM3DhPsRS3Uv

RybMFAeDSiWXiGgMS5NFR4KbnnBScCcaMhbv2Ga8gqbvKXcJKD VeZY6FeSiK+ovb

lZ9Rw/dCWMCWO4PVaUPCEPbFpGHhqYByYfOFNaioo8leNqTscUWaa5rl w2Ph3n0O

n4SiSHRfE4STgxO1XmKNo5BIa8/xAAB4ajZ32Bm2+3f1pTmNADTXOEFhJtLWNesc

2Y047E7IEKFZPKYKSuFcr/pgvecYtWPp5vRuJY7JryoZ3vVA0iFWMxXTNfItYC7S

6oFJnv9FfHHG8e1zgh8x+PJB1AEs6OPZGbacreLiSdTaO3Ij+q YcrdAVqepL7iUk

QZ0ZT4p3QtKk0IRPu5cZDPOxhfLUCdCpvEuAVU3OYEqNS5dblG 44/8zq3nHDZJ1m

9x63IAW44JbnIB7ZIHz+aJAi724ePuDma7hfjxuX+317H200Zg bQe6q5IHjF3T/l

nznATQdsdxJq3QeGWHfzSEOdNh+IZxymbU4aiwJAtc2ExPnfV9 WIBhL47flfrkuX

EfiMSeucgX5rUV0JdTNF

=SEIJ

-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--

xubuntu-devel mailing list

xubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com

https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel




--
Vincent

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

Vincent wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Lionel Le Folgoc <mrpouit@ubuntu.com
> <mailto:mrpouit@ubuntu.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi there,
>
> (I stripped some parts to reduce the size of the mail
>
> On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 03:41:03PM +0200, Pasi Lallinaho wrote:
> > Charlie Kravetz wrote:
> > > On Sat, 5 Dec 2009 09:05:45 +0100
> > > Steve Dodier <sidnioulz@gmail.com <mailto:sidnioulz@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > >> Both Synaptic and gnome-app-install are being replaced by the
> Software
> > >> Centre (not sure if it's the exact name). This new app brings
> a few
> > >> dependencies but it's likely that removing gnome-app-install
> and synaptic
> > >> will make enough room on the CD for it.
> > >> As long as it doesn't pull mono and gnome* I'm all for giving
> the new app a
> > >> try.
> > >>
> > >> Maybe we could ask the desktop team what they think will be
> ready for Lucid
> > >> in the software centre, and whether they think they'll be able
> to replace
> > >> synaptic in this release.
>
> There is enough room on the livecd anyway. I think that we *have to*
> switch to software-center for lucid, because gnome-app-install has
> already been demoted from main to universe in karmic (which means that
> Canonical folks don't want to support it anymore, and since they were
> the only ones touching it…).
>
>
> Let me chime in here: I *did* use gnome-app-install. And it was kind of
> my fault for not reporting the missing icons - I did see it, and notice
> it, but didn't really consciously do so. So I didn't report the bug. Has
> anybody reported it now?
>
> Anyway, I also told people to use that, because I found it to be more
> useful for finding "normal" programs, and less scary (normal names,
> icons, descriptions etc.). I do hope the Software Center will include
> support for showing all packages in a sane way, but I suppose we can
> only await that. Lionel's argument in favour of removing
> gnome-app-install is valid, though, but I'm afraid to see what the
> effects will be of Canonical not really taking Xubuntu into account.
>
> As for asking the devs what they think will be ready for Lucid: that's
> all documented at https://wiki.ubuntu.com/SoftwareCenter#Roadmap
>
>

Unless there is a graphical way to view ALL packages in the repository
the same way that Synaptics does, it does *NOT* deprecate Synaptics and
should not be considered such. Until it does it is only a deprecation of
gnome-app-install..

>
> > >>> 2) gnome-system-monitor
> > >>>
> > >>>> [snip]
> > >>>>
> > >>> For now, I don't think the Xfce components can deliver the
> same amount
> > >>> of features and, regretfully, quality. I also like htop, but
> we can't
> > >>> consider it as the main application for system monitoring, as
> it's CLI
> > >>> and many people fear command line.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> Gnome system monitor monitors system load, network load, ram
> and swap usage,
> > >> and HDD usage. It may be doing too much for one's needs, but
> when you want
> > >> to know if some app is using all of your bandwidth, it's cool
> to can check
> > >> in the system monitor without having to go in command line.
> > >>
> > >> While xftaskmanager may be more appropriate for your needs,
> > >> gnome-system-monitor is in my opinion better for end users.
> > >>
>
> We have already xfce4-cpugraph-plugin, xfce4-systemload-plugin,
> xfce4-netload-plugin and xfce4-taskmanager. The fact that gnome devs
> decided to make a single program (gnome-system-monitor) for that doesn't
> imply that we should blindly do the same.
>
> (Anyway, I've no strong opinion on this, I think htop is the best one.
> :P)
>
>
> xfce4-taskmanager needs some work to be user-friendly, IMHO. Not a very
> strong opinion on this either, though I'd keep using GSM I think. Of
> course, it might just happen that the problems get addressed upstream
> (for either project - are they even maintained?).
>

As I said in the original message, it is my opinion that GSM is too
bloated and consistently has too many performance problems for the
nature of the application.


- J


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