Michael Catanzaro píše v Út 13. 09. 2016 v 14:59 -0500:
On Sun, 2016-09-11 at 18:18 +0200, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
> Agreed, Bijiben 3.20 is broken, so I don't see a reason to include
FYI, you've responded to my proposals for F24... this one was already
implemented last cycle!
> I would keep it in for the time being, but it's true GNOME Boxes
> to improve. I'm not sure if we can achieve it with the current
> It's too simple to be used by power users. I've talked to Fedora QA
> several times what would have to change in order to make them
> Boxes as their daily drivers, so that it can get enough test
> There are quite a few fundamental features missing.
> I don't think that with the current scope of Boxes it's something
> virt guys who now develop virt-manager would be interested in.
> many fundamental features missing.
> So the problem of Boxes is that it could be a nice tool for average
> users, but people who can move it forward don't use it and because
> missing features it's not really interesting for them.
Well most of the bugs I complained about got fixed; it works fine for
me now. I use it on a daily basis and I'm pretty happy with it. When
tried to use virt-manager, I couldn't figure out how to create and
start a VM, so I'm pretty sure that's not a viable competitor. :)
We actually wound up moving Boxes to GNOME core upstream, shortly
after I wrote this complaint and Zeeshan started looking into those
bugs. There's really only one major problem I see remaining regarding
virtualization, which is that sometimes it gets stuck just spinning
its spinner forever. That's unfortunate, but not the end of the
world. The other major problem is that it replaced our remote desktop
client, vinagre, but it can't handle RDP yet. That would be a cool
project to work on.
I spoke with Kamil Paral of the Fedora QA the other day and when I
mentioned Boxes his comment was: "We tried to use it again, but found
it completely broken." We didn't go into any details and I will
certainly speak more in detail about with them. But this is what I got
after insisting they should use it on daily basis to properly test it.
I've used both virt-manager and Boxes and while you're right that the
user experience of virt-manager is pretty bad it's a tool that has
never failed on me unlike Boxes (people around me have similar
experience) + it covers pretty much all features required by power
In the last LinuxVoice magazine virt-manager even won the contest of
desktop virtualization tools for Linux, so apparently others don't find
it so hopeless and not being a viable contender.
And BTW Adding RDP support to Boxes is planned.