GNOME dependencies

[Hexzenn]

On 8/9/07, Lionel Le Folgoc <mrpouit at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Jani Monoses wrote:
> > Freddy Martinez wrote:
> >>> I am for the middle way.
> >> As am I :)
> >>
> >>>  I think brasero would be an excellent addition to xubuntu even if it
> has gnome
> >>> dependencies. I installed xubuntu for a few people (most of them
> >>> previous windows users) and I can tell that when an app doesn't work
> >>> the way they expect that makes more harm than good for the reputation
> >>> of xubuntu.
> >> Agreed. The fact that something like xfburn can't burn isos makes me
> >> not want to include it.  The trade-off with GNOME deps is one that I'm
> >> willing to take so long as the deps are reasonable and limited.
> >> Perhaps this is something we need to decide in a meeting.
> >
> > I've just tried out brasero and is indeed very slick, and most
> importantly burnt the CD without
> > a problem.
> >
> > If we add one libgnome dependent app the cost for the adding others
> decreases significantly so it will
> > probably mean we reconsider a good part of our app selection.
> > But please do not start proposing things right now, the apps we have not
> heard of are probably not
> > good enough to be included anyway.
> >
> > Lionel what do you think of this whole issue?
>
> Brasero comes with libgnome, libgnomeui, libgnome-keyring,
> libgnome-canvas, libnautilus-burn, libtotem-plparser, gstreamer0.10.
>
> If we add libgnome, the cost would decrease, so let's add libgnomeui,
> then libgnome-keyring, libgnome-canvas and so on...
>
> Then let's replace xarchiver with file-roller, gxine with totem (we
> added one libgnome dependent app, so one more won't hurt...), gqview
> with gthumb, and eventually, abiword/gnumeric with openoffice!
>
> Xubuntu is going to be as heavy as gnome, and 80% identical to Ubuntu,
> so what's the point of keeping building isos? People who really want to
> use xfce will install it with synaptic after a standard Ubuntu
> installation.
>
> I think we should drop the 'X' from Xubuntu now, that'll be less work...
>
> IMO, this 'idea' (it seems more like a bad joke for me) is not good for
> the future of Xubuntu: for gutsy+{2,3}, xubuntu would become a tasteless
> ubuntu fork.
>
> >
> >
> > Jani
> >
> >
>
> Cheers,
> Lionel
>
> --
> xubuntu-devel mailing list
> xubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
>

I agree with Lionel. Once a few Gnome apps are added, it becomes a slippery
slope and eventually we're left with little more than Ubuntu with
xubuntu-desktop installed, which (speaking from past experience) is
noticeably less responsive compared to a straight Xubuntu install.

I think the problem here is that there's a misconception that Xfce is meant
to be a Gnome replacement. It's not. It's a GTK-based DE meant to be as
light as possible, while still attempting to be as user-friendly possible.
It doesn't try to be as user-friendly as Gnome, and I think telling new
users that Xubuntu is "Ubuntu for old computers" is a little disingenuous,
especially once you start loading it with Gnome libs.

I use Xfce because 95% of my favorite apps are GTK-based, and I dislike
Gnome for a few reasons (useless bloat, some bad default apps, Gnome devs'
attitudes, etc). I'm using Xubuntu over Zenwalk because it's Debian-based,
which is easier to grasp over Slackware for newer users like me. However, if
Xubuntu becomes little more than Ubuntu with Xfce installed over it, I'll
have to learn the Slackware way of doing things...

I'm not trying to flame; this is just the way I feel.

Hexzenn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xubuntu-devel/attachments/20070809/4f8cc33c/attachment.html>