Sponsored link
Serve your customers, not your servers, with VERIO Linux VPS. Full-access test-drive here.
| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
Changing backgrounds
Changing backgrounds
Posted Apr 23, 2008 21:05 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1)In reply to: Changing backgrounds by ernstp
Parent article: The Grumpy Editor encounters the Hardy Heron
If I turn off the file manager, I expect not to have a file manager. I was surprised to find that it breaks seemingly unrelated functionality, especially given that things did work in previous releases. The breaking of something which once worked is called a "regression," normally.
So be it, this one is not that big of a deal. I can't see my background anyway (which is why I see no point in having nautilus cluttering it up), and xsetroot is sufficient to clear away the obnoxious default color scheme.
(Log in to post comments)
Changing backgrounds
Posted Apr 23, 2008 22:45 UTC (Wed) by russell (subscriber, #10458) [Link]
Is is still a regression if the GNOME developers never intended old releases to work that way? I would have thought nautilus was something GNOME developers could have counted on being around as a fundamental piece of infrastructure on which they can build on. Any GNOME developers out there?
Changing backgrounds
Posted Apr 23, 2008 23:19 UTC (Wed) by NCunningham (subscriber, #6457) [Link]
(Not a Gnome developer, but I am a developer) It doesn't matter how the developer intends the software to be used. Users will always come up with ways of using it that you never imagined. What counts is whether the knobs you provide for tuning your software work as advertised, regardless of which combination of settings the user tries. If they find a combination where something doesn't work as intended, you have a bug. If they find a combination where something works as intended, but not as desired, well... that's a feature request. In this case, it's a bug because the advertised functionality doesn't work as advertised in these circumstances.
Changing backgrounds
Posted Apr 24, 2008 1:20 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Well the guy that was asking the question asked 'If it was a regression', not 'if was a bug'. It may be a bug, but it's not a regression. It's always been like this as far as I know. It shouldn't be hard to fix, so file a bug report and let it go. They fix it or they don't.
nautilus =? infrastructure
Posted Apr 23, 2008 23:25 UTC (Wed) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link]
I don't run nautilus either. I don't want unrelated features built on it as "infrastructure". By all means put desktop file management features there. That's what it's for. Me, I use "mv", and prefer it. So, yes, this *is* a regression. Any core dependency on nautilus is a regression, just as would be any core dependency on tomboy or beagle. They're programs I don't happen to use, and that I see no reason to have installed. There are other programs that do behind-the-scenes work. Gnome-session seems like a not unreasonable place for this bit.
Changing backgrounds
Posted Apr 28, 2008 12:54 UTC (Mon) by ekj (subscriber, #1524) [Link]
Yes. Plain and simple yes. If doing that USED to work, but doesn't work TODAY, then it is a regression. It matters not how the developers, or anyone else, INTENDED it to work, what matters is actual behaviour. Actual behaviour is that right-clicking the desktop and setting the wallpaper USED to work, even for people without Nautilus running. Today it no longer works. That is a regression. It's not a major issue or anything, not as if this makes the computer unusable, but a regression nevertheless.
Changing backgrounds
Posted Apr 28, 2008 19:40 UTC (Mon) by superstoned (subscriber, #33164) [Link]
Hehe, talking of regressions, you'd like KDE 4.0 ;-) More serious, this is a weird thing. I would personally say it's good to reuse code (use Nautilus code to paint the background) but it was done wrong (needs Nautilus running somehow). Should be factored out in a common library, I would presume. Imho despite all it's shortcomings, KDE does things better in this regard - the infrastructure is in order. Let's see if our Grumpy friend will get acquainted with KDE again when 4.1 is out - see if he likes it.
Changing backgrounds
Posted Apr 29, 2008 6:09 UTC (Tue) by ekj (subscriber, #1524) [Link]
I personally don't mind minor regressions much. I deal, and like our grumpy editor I like living on the edge, and I'm fully aware that that means suffering bruises and cuts every now and then. I was just responding to the (imho!) very misguided idea that something that stops working somehow isn't a regression if the developer never "intended" it to work in the first place. I do indeed like KDE4, bugs and all.