Idea for Lucid (and beyond..)

Sun Dec 6 23:14:17 UTC 2009

On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 6:10 PM, Lionel Le Folgoc <mrpouit at 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 at 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

>
> > >>> 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.

>
> > >>
> > >>  [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.

>
> Cheers,
> Lionel
>
> --
> Lionel Le Folgoc - https://launchpad.net/~mrpouit
> E61E <https://launchpad.net/%7Emrpouit%0AE61E> 116D 4BA1 3936 0A33  F61D
> 65D9 A66E 10E2 969A
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJLGpPvAAoJEGXZpm4Q4paaBxEP/3wSufL471QlvYBfnWMGEUmj
> V7lRZTJ+J1DGkY3tQXMLGuNe7+cXR6epxhmFjVx+FwmIbSzsUekrB8d6cYUaN4Sk
> jguJwhFRzE9iYNkNL+EUvVJbHK+d9fEtLCWe3aGMi8cxk++bi8FdJM3DhPsRS3Uv
> RybMFAeDSiWXiGgMS5NFR4KbnnBScCcaMhbv2Ga8gqbvKXcJKDVeZY6FeSiK+ovb
> lZ9Rw/dCWMCWO4PVaUPCEPbFpGHhqYByYfOFNaioo8leNqTscUWaa5rlw2Ph3n0O
> n4SiSHRfE4STgxO1XmKNo5BIa8/xAAB4ajZ32Bm2+3f1pTmNADTXOEFhJtLWNesc
> 2Y047E7IEKFZPKYKSuFcr/pgvecYtWPp5vRuJY7JryoZ3vVA0iFWMxXTNfItYC7S
> 6oFJnv9FfHHG8e1zgh8x+PJB1AEs6OPZGbacreLiSdTaO3Ij+qYcrdAVqepL7iUk
> QZ0ZT4p3QtKk0IRPu5cZDPOxhfLUCdCpvEuAVU3OYEqNS5dblG44/8zq3nHDZJ1m
> 9x63IAW44JbnIB7ZIHz+aJAi724ePuDma7hfjxuX+317H200ZgbQe6q5IHjF3T/l
> nznATQdsdxJq3QeGWHfzSEOdNh+IZxymbU4aiwJAtc2ExPnfV9WIBhL47flfrkuX
> EfiMSeucgX5rUV0JdTNF
> =SEIJ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> --
> xubuntu-devel mailing list
> xubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
>
>

-- 
Vincent
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xubuntu-devel/attachments/20091207/e5286f45/attachment.html>