<div class="gmail_quote">2009/12/5 J. Anthony Limon <<a href="mailto:j@flippo.net">j@flippo.net</a>> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div><div></div><div class="h5">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 <<a href="mailto:sidnioulz@gmail.com">sidnioulz@gmail.com</a>> 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. > </div></div></blockquote><div>Agree with you, Lionel. And this leaves lot of room for working on upstream. :) </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div><div class="h5"> > Cheers, > Lionel > > </div></div>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). </blockquote><div> That's clearly due to the lack of testers: noone used gnome-app-install, so noone saw the bug. </div></div> -- Steve Dodier Student at École Nationale Supérieure d'Ingénieurs de Bourges Free Software Developer OpenPGP : 1B6B1670