| |||||||||||||
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway markClasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway markPosted Jan 25, 2013 19:44 UTC (Fri) by tetley80 (guest, #88691)In reply to: Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark by rahulsundaram Parent article: Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark
For all intents and purposes, MATE is Gnome 2. Furthermore, Red Hat is still maintaining Gnome 2 in RHEL 6. As such, Gnome 2 is far from dead.
You are of course correct in the above observation. However, this is boiling down to a chicken and egg argument (pardon the unintended pun). MATE probably wouldn't exist if Gnome 3 didn't have such massive UI changes. If Gnome 3 was more evolutionary, or had built in options to let people choose which new UI elements to use, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
The Fedora review process is hence broken, given the amount of fall out that the UI changes in Gnome 3 have generated. It strongly suggests the engineering steering committee has a very cavalier attitude when it comes to UI regressions.
This is consistent with a cop out. You have responsibility to the Fedora community, and instead of admitting that the Gnome 3 shell UI is a point of pain for many in the Fedora community, you are in effect telling them to go away.
(Log in to post comments)
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 25, 2013 20:42 UTC (Fri) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
GNOME 2 *upstream* is dead and GNOME 3 was that natural upgrade path for Fedora just like the upgrade from KDE 3 to KDE 4 or any other new upstream release. MATE and Cinnamon are more recent projects and they are available in the repo if you prefer them.
"You have responsibility to the Fedora community, and instead of admitting that the Gnome 3 shell UI is a point of pain for many in the Fedora community, you are in effect telling them to go away"
Now, you are being intentionally dishonest. I told you explicitly that I am working on integrating Enlightenment and I helped review Cinnamon as well. So no, I am not telling them to go away but use whatever they prefer and I am working on making those choices available.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 25, 2013 21:59 UTC (Fri) by tetley80 (guest, #88691) [Link]
So on one hand we have a major UI regression in a component that has worked fine for years, and on the other hand we're being told that this regression doesn't matter because of the many choices we have? Okay, let's follow this through. Gnome 2 used to be a first class citizen in Fedora. It has been replaced (not "upgraded") by a completely different user interface, known as the Gnome 3 shell. Packages such as Cinnamon are closer to the Gnome 2 UI, yet they're second class citizens (ie. I need to manually install them in F17/F18, or explicitly do a network install in F18). Yes, technically the choices are there, but you need to dig to find them. Summary: "You liked ABC? Sorry, you can't have it anymore. Here's DEF instead. Oh, you don't like that? Well, we have GHI which is kind of like ABC, but you'll have to find it yourself. Have fun!" If Fedora is serious about "making choices available", Cinnamon should be elevated to be one of the main options (in the installer) for the user interface, while also being present on the _default_ installation media. None of this separate "spin" nonsense. While this might be a workable solution, it's also a type of bug fix. It would be far more productive to prevent these kind of UI interface regressions in the future.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 25, 2013 22:12 UTC (Fri) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
You can easily install MATE which you claimed is equivalent to GNOME 2 so "ABC" is available just fine and no digging requires since is well advertised and widely documented.
sudo yum install @mate-desktop
The "default" download is a live image cannot hold all the different desktop environments due to size constraints and this is the reason we have multiple options at http://spins.fedoraproject.org. I am not sure what more you want honestly. You seem to be arguing for the sake of it.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 25, 2013 23:03 UTC (Fri) by tetley80 (guest, #88691) [Link]
The discussion started off about Cinnamon being the default UI for Fedora, so let's not fuzzify the issue by stating that the MATE desktop takes up too much space. Given all the pain about the Gnome 3 UI, Cinnamon provides a more traditional user interface, while still using Gnome 3 components. Cinnamon should be a first class citizen in Fedora (along with Gnome 3), and be on the default install media, not relegated to a separate spin. In contrast to MATE, Cinnamon requires relatively little space. It can be considered as an addon to Gnome 3, not a replacement like MATE. This discussion is starting to go around in circles, so I'll leave it here.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 26, 2013 1:22 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
I bought up MATE because you claimed that the equivalent doesn't exist and Fedora isn't providing the choices when it is demonstrably clear that there are multiple alternatives to suit everyone's personal preferences. I don't see why a single yum install cinnamon/ gnome-classic-session in Fedora 19 or the gui equivalent of checking a tick-box is that hard for anyone. You seem to want to insert your personal preference into the default image as an addition and claim that even a different image with your personal preference as a default isn't sufficient and I don't think you have provided any realistic justification for that.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 27, 2013 13:06 UTC (Sun) by deepfire (subscriber, #26138) [Link]
> You seem to want to insert your personal preference
Sorry for this bit of judgementality, but I used to regard you as
The "personal" preference sticker you slap on tetley80's words
Tread carefully -- the project you represent can handle only so much self-inflicted alienation.
Listen.. Can you hear it? The sound of mindshare going away?
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 27, 2013 15:06 UTC (Sun) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 27, 2013 15:06 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
I just represent myself and "personal preference" is a very neutral word. Like I said, you might not like something and that's fine but claiming that choices aren't available unless it is in the default image is hardly reasonable.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 26, 2013 0:53 UTC (Sat) by misc (subscriber, #73730) [Link]
> Furthermore, Red Hat is still maintaining Gnome 2 in RHEL 6.
So on one comment, you say that the fact that people are paid to work on a software should not be taken in account, and yet, you now use the same exact argument to say that since people are paid to keep gnome 2 aline, then it is not dead and so should be considered.
Can I recommend a little bit of self consistency ?
And frankly, for people wanting gnome 2, there is RHEL, SLES ( around 50$ per year ), or for the one who cannot afford this either due to volume or to any reason, there is Centos, Scientific Linux, etc.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 26, 2013 17:06 UTC (Sat) by pboddie (subscriber, #50784) [Link]
Self-consistency doesn't come into it here. By noting that people are paid by Red Hat to maintain GNOME 2, it indulges and then demolishes the argument that the existence of paid maintainers must be the factor that determines inclusion in Fedora (subject to argument about the relationship between Fedora and RHEL).
Of course, Red Hat may be eager to stop having to maintain GNOME 2, and the real reason may be that the existence of external paid developers is what really decides whether something is included in any of the company's products - a matter of not having to bear all the load internally - plus the level of enthusiasm for GNOME 3 amongst internal developers compared to that for GNOME 2, but I'd also hope that the users of the company's products might also get some say (other than voting with their feet, of course).
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 26, 2013 20:49 UTC (Sat) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
It doesn't demolish anything really. Fedora is not a Red Hat product and Red Hat maintains an older version of GNOME 2 than what was included in Fedora when it was replaced by GNOME 3. Red Hat is willing to put in that additional resources to maintain a commercial product but those same resources are not available for Fedora. It isn't about external paid developers as such since majority of the GNOME developers are from Red Hat in the first place but paid development is part of how you evaluate sustainability of the project. Maintaining a older version has a significant cost and that is not the focus of Fedora. All of this should really be obvious I think.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 29, 2013 17:09 UTC (Tue) by hadrons123 (guest, #72126) [Link]
Fedora is not a Red Hat product
Is it so?
That's an interesting piece of information to know from you.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 29, 2013 17:56 UTC (Tue) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
If you have ever read the original announcement of Fedora or ever visited the about section in http://fedoraproject.org or heck if you just see the domain name, you would have known this about 8 or so years back.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 30, 2013 15:14 UTC (Wed) by hadrons123 (guest, #72126) [Link]
I do know that fedora is a red hat sponsored community product, but you are asking us to believe that red hat has no role in what packages gets in and out of fedora, specifically for example cinnamon or systemd. Fedora Cinnamon package review was waiting for more than 6 months citing various reasons and finally it was uploaded. I do appreciate and thank your effort in getting cinnamon in to the official repos, but you have to admit that there was so much hesitation from other people in Fedora camp.
Clasen: GNOME 3.7 at the halfway mark Posted Jan 30, 2013 15:48 UTC (Wed) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946) [Link]
You have shifted your points but yes, Red Hat has zero role in Cinnamon or systemd getting into Fedora. You don't have to take my word for it. The review process is entirely public.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=771252
It was submitted by a volunteer, Leigh Scott and I took up the review voluntarily.The major opposition came from another volunteer, Christoph Wickert who was concerned about sustainability and violation of packaging guidelines regarding forks and we discussed it with the packaging committee and it was eventually approved by another volunteer, Dan Mashal. The delay was partly my fault since I took up the review and didn't finish it up quickly since I was focusing on release specific tasks at that time and we also had to get the packaging committee approval and the reviews themselves took time.
systemd was submitted by me and approved by another volunteer.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=598299
It became the default after approval by FESCo (a fully elected body btw) which did delay it by one release despite having a number of Red Hat employees in it. So if you are looking for favoritism you have picked the wrong examples. Are there other packages submitted by Red Hat employees as part of the job? yes but the important point is that the process is not designed to be any different regardless of who you work for.
|
|||||||||||||