xfce4 svn snapshot
danjele at gmail.com
Mon Jan 30 22:47:19 UTC 2006
On 1/30/06, Jani Monoses <jani.monoses at gmail.com> wrote:
> > well .. that's why i'm saying to split it :)
> it is too much trouble right now. if upstream or debian packagers split it
> fine, but we should not
> spend time on this.
> > > on my todo list for a while, but not at the top :)
> > can we help you on that ? ... i mean you TODO list, maybe with some
> > help you can go faster.
> well the TODO list is roughly what is written down in the dapper progress
> wiki page.
> One good candidate from there which requires deb packaging skills is the
> issue. The debian maintainer of gnumeric said he's willing to take pacthes
> to build a gtk-only
> version from the same source package.
> Since gnumeric depends on libgoffice that package has to be modified too.
> Both these have --disable-gnome
> switches from upstream so it is just a matter of packaging, but not trivial
> as the rules files are a bit complicated
> and the relation of the gtk-only vs gnome enabled version of these packages
> needs to be figured out. Whether
> they can be installed along eachoter or not, and if the former how to name
> the libraries. Messy stuff.
> If we cannot solve this, then gnumeric will not be part of xubuntu-desktop
> but probably shipped on the CD
> along with gnome libraries.
> Other help still packaging related is splitting python-gnome2 to be more
> fine grained like the ruby bindings are. Right now if you need gnomevanvas
> bindings (used by hwdb-client.py) it will still bring in all gnome libs
> instead of just libgnomecanvas.
> But this work would mean convincing Sebastien Bacher (seb128 - the ubuntu
> gnome packager) and things which need convincing people always end up at the
> bottom of my todo list as they incur a lot of waiting and sometimes needless
> arguments. But feel free to try ;)
i will take a look on this, but i can't promise anything before the
week end, for c code ... i don't think i'm the best person for that
> > i was waitin that ChipX86 released the new version , notify-daemon was
> > not really a good app as it was notification-deamon. now
> > notification-daemon 0.3.2 is out and is really cool, something has
> > been changed in the spec so i fixed that ... mainly it just works, but
> > it still needs some tests for the rules parser. i'll write some docs
> > about it as soon as those tests are over. Then i'll begin to code the
> > frontend to configure it, maybe importing modules from
> > hal-device-manager ... if they'll remove gnome deps .. if not i'll
> > write something similar :).
> the thing that worries me here that it is new code and I don't see what it
> fixes that cannot be done now
> with ivman or by fixing ivman. It may be a better choice for dapper+1 but
> right now I wouldn't want to risk.
i totally agree, my volume manager can be used anyway as just an
"assistant" , that shows notifications without performing actions, it
doesn't conflicts with ivman or gnome-vm, but i can't tell it's ready
for main :). Nobodies tested it if not me so ...
I would just say that you shouldn't cosider it just as a volume
manager, it can even be a nice way to notify the user about what's
happening on his system.
> > what about xfce-galago ? ... i think it could improve the usability,
> > there is a plugin for gaim that uses gnome-galago ... maybe it will
> > not be used in dapper but for next release i'm pretty sure we'll see
> > it in the ubuntu roadmap.
> I'm not sure ubuntu/gnome supports galago, and we don't want to be ahead of
> them ;)
not at the moment but i feel it will, and there are already gnome
apps, to have the same in xfce maybe it's better to take a look as
soon as possible or it will be hard to have it in dapper+1.
I really think notifications more then "autumount" stuff is way to
improve desktop usability, and galago project is doing a great job in
More information about the xubuntu-devel