system-* tools' ui independence

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

hi,

I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
descriminate KDE by using GTK.

YaST authors separated UI library, so you [Red Hat or Community] can
easily rewrite our tools to integrate well with KDE and GTK-based
environments.

http://visnov.blogspot.com/2008/02/yast-user-interface-library-is-now.html

-- 
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
http://liviopl.jogger.pl/

[Harald Hoyer]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  hi,
>  
>  I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>  descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>  
>  YaST authors separated UI library, so you [Red Hat or Community] can
>  easily rewrite our tools to integrate well with KDE and GTK-based
>  environments.
>  
>  http://visnov.blogspot.com/2008/02/yast-user-interface-library-is-now.html
>   
License of this thing?

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

>  License of this thing? 
I believe GPLv2+ or GPLv3.

-- 
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
http://liviopl.jogger.pl/

[Harald Hoyer]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > License of this thing?
>  
>  I believe GPLv2+ or GPLv3.
>   
URL?

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

2008/2/27, Harald Hoyer <harald(a)redhat.com&gt;:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>   >> License of this thing?
>   >
>   > I believe GPLv2+ or GPLv3.
>   >
>
>
>  URL?
>  
Proof of GPLv2: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST_Development

Library currently has no homepage...

-- 
Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
http://liviopl.jogger.pl/

[Harald Hoyer]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  2008/2/27, Harald Hoyer <harald(a)redhat.com&gt;:
> > Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >  >> License of this thing?
> >  >
> >  > I believe GPLv2+ or GPLv3.
> >  >
> >
> >
> > URL?
> >
>  
>  Proof of GPLv2: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST_Development
>  
>  Library currently has no homepage...
>   
now I only need a python and a glade-2 interface :)

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Harald Hoyer pisze:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > 2008/2/27, Harald Hoyer <harald(a)redhat.com&gt;:
> >> Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >> >> License of this thing?
> >> >
> >> > I believe GPLv2+ or GPLv3.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> URL?
> >>
> >
> > Proof of GPLv2: http://en.opensuse.org/YaST_Development
> >
> > Library currently has no homepage...
> >
>
>  now I only need a python and a glade-2 interface :)
>  
But this is GTK-dependent. You're discriminating KDE users.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:

>  
>  But this is GTK-dependent. You're discriminating KDE users. 
Would developing in Python be discriminating Perl users?

Rahul

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Rahul Sundaram pisze:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>
> >
> > But this is GTK-dependent. You're discriminating KDE users.
>
>  Would developing in Python be discriminating Perl users?
>
>  Rahul
>  
You do not understand. KDE users have Qt, so Qt should be used in there 
for config tools. They do not need GTK.

GNOME and XFCE users have GTK, so here GTK is used.

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:23 AM, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
<jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Rahul Sundaram pisze:
>
>  > Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>   >
>   >>
>   >> But this is GTK-dependent. You're discriminating KDE users.
>   >
>   > Would developing in Python be discriminating Perl users?
>   >
>   > Rahul
>   >
>
>   You do not understand. KDE users have Qt, so Qt should be used in there
>   for config tools. They do not need GTK.
>
>   GNOME and XFCE users have GTK, so here GTK is used. 

KDE users also have Firefox, OpenOffice, Inkscape, GIMP... as long as
it doesn't pull in all of Gnome, it's fine by me.


-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  Rahul Sundaram pisze:
> > Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> But this is GTK-dependent. You're discriminating KDE users.
> >
> > Would developing in Python be discriminating Perl users?
> >
> > Rahul
> >
>  
>  You do not understand.   KDE users have Qt, so Qt should be used in there
>  for config tools. They do not need GTK.
>  
>  GNOME and XFCE users have GTK, so here GTK is used. 
People who choose to do the development did it in whatever toolkit and 
language they preferred. Nothing is stopping you from duplicating that 
work in whatever toolkit you prefer or even porting Yast to Fedora but 
writing in one toolkit is not discriminating any desktop environment. It 
might not be ideal but works fine.

Rahul

[Pekka Pietikäinen]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 07:59:21PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  People who choose to do the development did it in whatever toolkit
> and 
>  language they preferred. Nothing is stopping you from duplicating that work 
>  in whatever toolkit you prefer or even porting Yast to Fedora but writing 
>  in one toolkit is not discriminating any desktop environment. It might not 
>  be ideal but works fine. 
It's probably still worth checking out. 

Worst case after lots of work the UI library forces some crappy subset of
Qt/GTK/text on all the config tools (Inherently such a library will always
limit what you can do with the UI) + extra bloat (since you'll still need
GTK or Qt)

Best case current functionality is kept (for little conversion work), people
get their native UI look and we get a kick-ass text UI as a bonus.

Reality? Something in the middle, I'm sure ;)

-- 
Pekka Pietikainen

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Pekka Pietikainen <pp(a)ee.oulu.fi&gt; wrote:
>  On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 07:59:21PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>   > People who choose to do the development did it in whatever toolkit and
>   > language they preferred. Nothing is stopping you from duplicating that work
>   > in whatever toolkit you prefer or even porting Yast to Fedora but writing
>   > in one toolkit is not discriminating any desktop environment. It might not
>   > be ideal but works fine.
>   It's probably still worth checking out.
>
>   Worst case after lots of work the UI library forces some crappy subset of
>   Qt/GTK/text on all the config tools (Inherently such a library will always
>   limit what you can do with the UI) + extra bloat (since you'll still need
>   GTK or Qt)
>
>   Best case current functionality is kept (for little conversion work), people
>   get their native UI look and we get a kick-ass text UI as a bonus.
>
>   Reality? Something in the middle, I'm sure ;)
>
>   --
>   Pekka Pietikainen 

Maybe I am the one who is confused, but from what I read at the link,
they decoupled the GUI from the C++ library which did the actual work,
the idea being so that others could write new GUIs and just plug in to
the library.

You guys are talking like it's the other way around, there is no
subset of widgets or anything of the sort. Aside from the fact that I
think the backend code for manipulating config files should be in a
transparent scripting language, I don't see how Yast would help.

-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Arthur Pemberton pisze:
>  On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Pekka
> Pietikainen<pp(a)ee.oulu.fi>  wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 07:59:21PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> >   >  People who choose to do the development did it in whatever toolkit and
> >   >  language they preferred. Nothing is stopping you from duplicating that work
> >   >  in whatever toolkit you prefer or even porting Yast to Fedora but writing
> >   >  in one toolkit is not discriminating any desktop environment. It might not
> >   >  be ideal but works fine.
> >   It's probably still worth checking out.
> >
> >   Worst case after lots of work the UI library forces some crappy subset of
> >   Qt/GTK/text on all the config tools (Inherently such a library will always
> >   limit what you can do with the UI) + extra bloat (since you'll still need
> >   GTK or Qt)
> >
> >   Best case current functionality is kept (for little conversion work), people
> >   get their native UI look and we get a kick-ass text UI as a bonus.
> >
> >   Reality? Something in the middle, I'm sure ;)
> >
> >   --
> >   Pekka Pietikainen
>
>
>  Maybe I am the one who is confused, but from what I read at the link,
>  they decoupled the GUI from the C++ library which did the actual work,
>  the idea being so that others could write new GUIs and just plug in to
>  the library.
>
>  You guys are talking like it's the other way around, there is no
>  subset of widgets or anything of the sort. Aside from the fact that I
>  think the backend code for manipulating config files should be in a
>  transparent scripting language, I don't see how Yast would help.
>  
YaST has nothing to do here. UI library was separated from YaST, and 
it's all about.

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 9:07 AM, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
<jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Arthur Pemberton pisze:
>
>
>  > On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Pekka Pietikainen&lt;pp(a)ee.oulu.fi&gt;  wrote:
>   >> On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 07:59:21PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>   >>   >  People who choose to do the development did it in whatever toolkit and
>   >>   >  language they preferred. Nothing is stopping you from duplicating that
> work
>   >>   >  in whatever toolkit you prefer or even porting Yast to Fedora but
> writing
>   >>   >  in one toolkit is not discriminating any desktop environment. It might
> not
>   >>   >  be ideal but works fine.
>   >>   It's probably still worth checking out.
>   >>
>   >>   Worst case after lots of work the UI library forces some crappy subset of
>   >>   Qt/GTK/text on all the config tools (Inherently such a library will always
>   >>   limit what you can do with the UI) + extra bloat (since you'll still
> need
>   >>   GTK or Qt)
>   >>
>   >>   Best case current functionality is kept (for little conversion work), people
>   >>   get their native UI look and we get a kick-ass text UI as a bonus.
>   >>
>   >>   Reality? Something in the middle, I'm sure ;)
>   >>
>   >>   --
>   >>   Pekka Pietikainen
>   >
>   >
>   > Maybe I am the one who is confused, but from what I read at the link,
>   > they decoupled the GUI from the C++ library which did the actual work,
>   > the idea being so that others could write new GUIs and just plug in to
>   > the library.
>   >
>   > You guys are talking like it's the other way around, there is no
>   > subset of widgets or anything of the sort. Aside from the fact that I
>   > think the backend code for manipulating config files should be in a
>   > transparent scripting language, I don't see how Yast would help.
>   >
>
>   YaST has nothing to do here. UI library was separated from YaST, and
>   it's all about. 

I was mistaken.


-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
<jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  hi,
>
>   I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>   descriminate KDE by using GTK. 
I really don't agree with this sentiment, and I'm a bonafide KDE user.
I'm not trying to tell you what to do, but to say that it is
discriminating against KDE is really unnecessary, and I would argue,
untrue.

-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
<jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  hi,
>
>   I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>   descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>
>   YaST authors separated UI library, so you [Red Hat or Community] can
>   easily rewrite our tools to integrate well with KDE and GTK-based
>   environments.
>
>   http://visnov.blogspot.com/2008/02/yast-user-interface-library-is-now.html 

Oh yah, and unless I'm really mistaken, UI toolkits are not backends.
And is there reason to believe that they Yast libraries actually work
with the Fedora config files?



-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Nils Philippsen]

On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 13:23 +0100, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>  descriminate KDE by using GTK. 
I say that our tools using gtk/pygtk doesn't discriminate against KDE a
bit. If having a GTK app on KDE would be such an abomination to the
eyes, surely someone would have come up with a theme which resembles
Qt/KDE so closely nobody would notice. Or are there any interop issues
still open -- what doesn't work because these tools use GTK?

Nils
-- 
     Nils Philippsen    /    Red Hat    /    nphilipp(a)redhat.com
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary
 Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."  --  B. Franklin, 1759
 PGP fingerprint:  C4A8 9474 5C4C ADE3 2B8F  656D 47D8 9B65 6951 3011

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Nils Philippsen pisze:
>  On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 13:23 +0100, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
> wrote:
> > I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
> > descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>
>  I say that our tools using gtk/pygtk doesn't discriminate against KDE a
>  bit. If having a GTK app on KDE would be such an abomination to the
>  eyes, surely someone would have come up with a theme which resembles
>  Qt/KDE so closely nobody would notice. Or are there any interop issues
>  still open -- what doesn't work because these tools use GTK?
>
>  Nils 
GTK is not so compatible with Qt.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  Nils Philippsen pisze:
> > On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 13:23 +0100, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >> I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
> >> descriminate KDE by using GTK.
> >
> > I say that our tools using gtk/pygtk doesn't discriminate against KDE a
> > bit. If having a GTK app on KDE would be such an abomination to the
> > eyes, surely someone would have come up with a theme which resembles
> > Qt/KDE so closely nobody would notice. Or are there any interop issues
> > still open -- what doesn't work because these tools use GTK?
> >
> > Nils
>  
>  GTK is not so compatible with Qt. 
What does compatibility mean here and why does that matter for the 
desktop environment?

Rahul

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Rahul Sundaram pisze:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > Nils Philippsen pisze:
> >> On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 13:23 +0100, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >>> I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
> >>> descriminate KDE by using GTK.
> >>
> >> I say that our tools using gtk/pygtk doesn't discriminate against KDE a
> >> bit. If having a GTK app on KDE would be such an abomination to the
> >> eyes, surely someone would have come up with a theme which resembles
> >> Qt/KDE so closely nobody would notice. Or are there any interop issues
> >> still open -- what doesn't work because these tools use GTK?
> >>
> >> Nils
> >
> > GTK is not so compatible with Qt.
>
>  What does compatibility mean here and why does that matter for the
>  desktop environment?
>
>  Rahul
>  
Actually, I mean KDE, because:

1) When GTK app running in KDE, KDE's icons are not displayed in that app.

2) When KDE desktop's menu enabled, GTK apps won't show their menu there.

FreeDesktop.org must work on this to provide desktop-agnostic and 
dbus-based menubar protocol.
Then GNOME could implement this too.

[Benjamin Kreuter]

On Wednesday 27 February 2008 13:29:23 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  What does compatibility mean here and why does that matter for the
>  desktop environment?
>  
Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons in the opposite 
place as Qt apps (though it is not a requirement).

-- Benjamin Kreuter



-- 
Message sent on: Fri Feb 29 12:26:29 EST 2008

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Benjamin Kreuter pisze:
>  On Wednesday 27 February 2008 13:29:23 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > What does compatibility mean here and why does that matter for the
> > desktop environment?
> >
>
>  Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons in the opposite
>  place as Qt apps (though it is not a requirement). 
It's not a requirement but it's a well known difference.
KDE folks are saying that GNOME is wrong with this. Question of selection.

[Arthur Pemberton]

2008/2/29 Benjamin Kreuter <ben.kreuter(a)gmail.com&gt;:
>  On Wednesday 27 February 2008 13:29:23 Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>   >
>   > What does compatibility mean here and why does that matter for the
>   > desktop environment?
>   >
>
>   Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons in the opposite
>   place as Qt apps (though it is not a requirement). 

You need to be beaten with a stick for noticing this. I have been
using KDE as my DE for years and haven't noticed this.


-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Matej Cepl]

On 2008-02-29, 17:27 GMT, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
>  Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons 
>  in the opposite place as Qt apps (though it is not 
>  a requirement). 
You are either using KDE and you haven't seen Gnome for a long 
time, or you have seriously outdated system. Gnome doesn't use 
(or shouldn't use) OK button for many years.

Matej

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Matej Cepl pisze:
>  On 2008-02-29, 17:27 GMT, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> > Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons
> > in the opposite place as Qt apps (though it is not
> > a requirement).
>
>  You are either using KDE and you haven't seen Gnome for a long
>  time, or you have seriously outdated system. Gnome doesn't use
>  (or shouldn't use) OK button for many years.
>
>  Matej 
Sometimes uses.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  Matej Cepl pisze:
> > On 2008-02-29, 17:27 GMT, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> >> Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons
> >> in the opposite place as Qt apps (though it is not
> >> a requirement).
> >
> > You are either using KDE and you haven't seen Gnome for a long
> > time, or you have seriously outdated system. Gnome doesn't use
> > (or shouldn't use) OK button for many years.
> >
> > Matej
>  
>  Sometimes uses. 
That would be considered bugs. Do you have examples?

Rahul

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

2008/3/1, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>   > Matej Cepl pisze:
>   >> On 2008-02-29, 17:27 GMT, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
>   >>> Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons
>   >>> in the opposite place as Qt apps (though it is not
>   >>> a requirement).
>   >>
>   >> You are either using KDE and you haven't seen Gnome for a long
>   >> time, or you have seriously outdated system. Gnome doesn't use
>   >> (or shouldn't use) OK button for many years.
>   >>
>   >> Matej
>   >
>   > Sometimes uses.
>
>
>  That would be considered bugs. Do you have examples? 
Of course.

Press [Alt]+[F2] and click [Help]. It produces error message with [Ok]
button for me.

http://img.wklej.org/images/82492help-btn.png

[Andrew Farris]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  2008/3/1, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;:
> > Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >  > Matej Cepl pisze:
> >  >> On 2008-02-29, 17:27 GMT, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> >  >>> Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons
> >  >>> in the opposite place as Qt apps (though it is not
> >  >>> a requirement).
> >  >>
> >  >> You are either using KDE and you haven't seen Gnome for a long
> >  >> time, or you have seriously outdated system. Gnome doesn't use
> >  >> (or shouldn't use) OK button for many years.
> >  >>
> >  >> Matej
> >  >
> >  > Sometimes uses.
> >
> >
> > That would be considered bugs. Do you have examples?
>  
>  Of course.
>  
>  Press [Alt]+[F2] and click [Help]. It produces error message with [Ok]
>  button for me.
>  
>  http://img.wklej.org/images/82492help-btn.png
>   
'File the bug. :)

-- 
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul(a)gmail.com&gt; www.lordmorgul.net
  gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
----                                                                       ----

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Andrew Farris pisze:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > 2008/3/1, Rahul Sundaram <sundaram(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;:
> >> Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >> > Matej Cepl pisze:
> >> >> On 2008-02-29, 17:27 GMT, Benjamin Kreuter wrote:
> >> >>> Well, for example, GTK apps usually have OK and Cancel buttons
> >> >>> in the opposite place as Qt apps (though it is not
> >> >>> a requirement).
> >> >>
> >> >> You are either using KDE and you haven't seen Gnome for a long
> >> >> time, or you have seriously outdated system. Gnome doesn't use
> >> >> (or shouldn't use) OK button for many years.
> >> >>
> >> >> Matej
> >> >
> >> > Sometimes uses.
> >>
> >>
> >> That would be considered bugs. Do you have examples?
> >
> > Of course.
> >
> > Press [Alt]+[F2] and click [Help]. It produces error message with [Ok]
> > button for me.
> >
> > http://img.wklej.org/images/82492help-btn.png
> >
>  'File the bug. :) 
Don't be silly. That's a feature, not a bug :D !

Unique OK button :D .

[Christopher Aillon]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>  descriminate KDE by using GTK. 
Maybe we should make things just work out of the box where we can, so we 
can get rid of the need to have system-config-* cruft and discriminate 
against both.

[Lubomir Kundrak]

On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 18:02 -0500, Christopher Aillon wrote:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  > I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>  > descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>  
>  Maybe we should make things just work out of the box where we can, so we 
>  can get rid of the need to have system-config-* cruft and discriminate 
>  against both. 
I'm wondering which things would have to be made work out of box so that
you could get rid of system-config-users, etc. :)

-- 
Lubomir Kundrak (Red Hat Security Response Team)

[Andrew Farris]

Lubomir Kundrak wrote:
>  On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 18:02 -0500, Christopher Aillon wrote:
> > Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >> I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
> >> descriminate KDE by using GTK.
> > Maybe we should make things just work out of the box where we can, so we 
> > can get rid of the need to have system-config-* cruft and discriminate 
> > against both.
>  
>  I'm wondering which things would have to be made work out of box so that
>  you could get rid of system-config-users, etc. :) 
Thats easy.. blank root password and autologin. ;)

-- 
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul(a)gmail.com&gt; www.lordmorgul.net
  gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
----                                                                       ----

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Christopher Aillon <caillon(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>   > I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>   > descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>
>   Maybe we should make things just work out of the box where we can, so we
>   can get rid of the need to have system-config-* cruft and discriminate
>   against both. 

So you're going to write mind reading software to know what resolution
I want my display set to? And what directories I want to share via
nfs?


-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Matthias Clasen]

On Wed, 2008-02-27 at 17:57 -0600, Arthur Pemberton wrote:
>  On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Christopher Aillon
> <caillon(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  >  > I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>  >  > descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>  >
>  >  Maybe we should make things just work out of the box where we can, so we
>  >  can get rid of the need to have system-config-* cruft and discriminate
>  >  against both.
>  
>  
>  So you're going to write mind reading software to know what resolution
>  I want my display set to? And what directories I want to share via
>  nfs? 
We are currently investing effort into bringing the screen resolution
capplet into the modern xrandr world. This will soon make
system-config-display obsolete. 

NetworkManager is gaining capabilities for dealing with system-wide
connections right now. 

The clock applet lets you change time zones now. 

These are 3 examples of "getting rid of the need to have
system-config-*". Mind reading not required. 


Matthias

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 7:14 PM, Matthias Clasen <mclasen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>   We are currently investing effort into bringing the screen
> resolution
>   capplet into the modern xrandr world. This will soon make
>   system-config-display obsolete. 
Fair enough

>   NetworkManager is gaining capabilities for dealing with system-wide
>   connections right now. 
With all due respect to the NetworkManager devs, this particular piece
of software regularly betrays me at times when I can't be dealing with
network issues -- there is currently a hate thread going on in the
main list, not started by myself

>   The clock applet lets you change time zones now.
>
>   These are 3 examples of "getting rid of the need to have
>   system-config-*". Mind reading not required. 
Fair enough but I doubt there will be a point when there will be no
more of these tools.

-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Arthur Pemberton pisze:
>  On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 7:14 PM, Matthias
> Clasen<mclasen(a)redhat.com>  wrote:
> >   We are currently investing effort into bringing the screen resolution
> >   capplet into the modern xrandr world. This will soon make
> >   system-config-display obsolete.
>
>  Fair enough 
Curious, how this is gonna work...

Sometimes I have broken xorg.conf and no copy on Internet so then some 
tool is needed.

> >   NetworkManager is gaining capabilities for dealing with system-wide
> >   connections right now.
>
>  With all due respect to the NetworkManager devs, this particular piece
>  of software regularly betrays me at times when I can't be dealing with
>  network issues -- there is currently a hate thread going on in the
>  main list, not started by myself 
That's good, but too late for me (; .
I had static conf over network, but now I have router with static IPs 
set for MACs. DHCP used.

[Matej Cepl]

On 2008-02-28, 05:45 GMT, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  Sometimes I have broken xorg.conf and no copy on Internet so 
>  then some tool is needed. 
Since FC6 everything Should Work™ even without any 
/etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever.

Matěj

[Ralf Ertzinger]

Hi.

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:44:55 +0100, Matej Cepl wrote:

>  Since FC6 everything Should Work™ even without any 
>  /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever. 
Should I file a bug if it does not? My X60s does not work without one.

[Jerry James]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 6:06 AM, Ralf Ertzinger <fedora(a)camperquake.de&gt; wrote:
>  Hi.
>
>
>   On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 13:44:55 +0100, Matej Cepl wrote:
>
>   > Since FC6 everything Should Work™ even without any
>   > /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever.
>
>   Should I file a bug if it does not? My X60s does not work without one. 
The KVM switch in my server room seems to block autodetection of the
mouse and monitor (the keyboard is a vanilla PC105; I bet if it was
some multimedia keyboard that it would also be configured
incorrectly).  I have to explicitly configure the mouse and monitor in
xorg.conf.  I consider that an unfortunate property of my hardware,
rather than a software bug.  Should I think otherwise?
-- 
Jerry James
http://loganjerry.googlepages.com/

[Matej Cepl]

On 2008-02-28, 17:00 GMT, Jerry James wrote:
>  The KVM switch in my server room seems to block autodetection 
>  of the mouse and monitor (the keyboard is a vanilla PC105; 
>  I bet if it was some multimedia keyboard that it would also be 
>  configured incorrectly).  I have to explicitly configure the 
>  mouse and monitor in xorg.conf.  I consider that an unfortunate 
>  property of my hardware, rather than a software bug.  Should 
>  I think otherwise? 
That's weird -- we should at least default to something sane 
(like vanilla PC105 keyboard). Yes, please, file a bug with 
/var/log/Xorg.0.log and with /etc/X11/xorg.conf you need to use.

Matěj

[Jerry James]

On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Matej Cepl <mcepl(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On 2008-02-28, 17:00 GMT, Jerry James wrote:
>   > The KVM switch in my server room seems to block autodetection
>   > of the mouse and monitor (the keyboard is a vanilla PC105;
>   > I bet if it was some multimedia keyboard that it would also be
>   > configured incorrectly).  I have to explicitly configure the
>   > mouse and monitor in xorg.conf.  I consider that an unfortunate
>   > property of my hardware, rather than a software bug.  Should
>   > I think otherwise?
>
>   That's weird -- we should at least default to something sane
>   (like vanilla PC105 keyboard). Yes, please, file a bug with
>   /var/log/Xorg.0.log and with /etc/X11/xorg.conf you need to use. 
Sorry, I wasn't clear enough.  The keyboard works fine.  The monitor
is not autodetected, so I get some low resolution, 800x600 I think.  I
also have to turn off the hardware cursor or I get an invisible mouse
pointer.  If I plug the same hardware directly into the computer when
it boots, then it gets detected fine.  The KVM switch appears to be
getting in the way somehow.
-- 
Jerry James
http://loganjerry.googlepages.com/

[Matej Cepl]

On 2008-02-29, 18:52 GMT, Jerry James wrote:
>  Sorry, I wasn't clear enough.  The keyboard works fine.  The 
>  monitor is not autodetected, so I get some low resolution, 
>  800x600 I think.  I also have to turn off the hardware cursor 
>  or I get an invisible mouse pointer.  If I plug the same 
>  hardware directly into the computer when it boots, then it gets 
>  detected fine.  The KVM switch appears to be getting in the way 
>  somehow. 
These are all obviously bugs and they should be fixed.

Matej

[Matej Cepl]

On 2008-02-28, 13:06 GMT, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
> > Since FC6 everything Should Work™ even without any 
> > /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever.
>
>  Should I file a bug if it does not? My X60s does not work without one. 
Take a look whether there isn't already one, and define exactly 
what “does not work” mean for you, but otherwise YES!

Matěj

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Matej Cepl pisze:
>  On 2008-02-28, 05:45 GMT, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > Sometimes I have broken xorg.conf and no copy on Internet so
> > then some tool is needed.
>
>  Since FC6 everything Should Work™ even without any
>  /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever.
>
>  Matěj
>  
O rly? Resolution 800x600 while my display supports 1024x768 doesn't 
satisfy me.

Also, nv or nouveau drivers are not supporting my graphics card well.
And again, I can't set Digital Vibrance with them.

Another problem with xorg.conf? My display displays everything darker 
than it is in reality, so I must to use gamma.

I like Compiz, I must enable some options.

I want my video to my bright as desktop, so I must to enable GL for XvMC.

I must to set DisplaySize to get good DPI (it was broken some months ago 
to be "proper", but it's not).

[Jesse Keating]

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:00:39 +0100
"Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek" <jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  O rly? 
You know, doing that only embarrasses you and everybody around you.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?

[Matej Cepl]

On 2008-02-28, 15:00 GMT, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  O rly? Resolution 800x600 while my display supports 1024x768 
>  doesn't satisfy me. 
That's bug (and probably already filed).

>  Also, nv or nouveau drivers are not supporting my graphics card
> well.
>  And again, I can't set Digital Vibrance with them. 
I was not saying that every cool feature of your card (especially 
nVidia, ehm) will work out of the box, but it should at least 
work somehow. And concerning nouveau -- the developers are my 
heros, but it is still kind of alpha.

>  Another problem with xorg.conf? My display displays everything darker
>
>  than it is in reality, so I must to use gamma. 
Probably bug. File it.

>  I like Compiz, I must enable some options. 
I am not promising that out of the box without xorg.conf.

>  I want my video to my bright as desktop, so I must to enable GL for
> XvMC. 
Your configuration choice. We are not good in mind-reading.

>  I must to set DisplaySize to get good DPI (it was broken some months
> ago 
>  to be "proper", but it's not). 
The same, but if it is regression (i.e., it did work without 
xorg.conf) than it might be a bug.

Matěj

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Matej Cepl pisze:
>  On 2008-02-28, 15:00 GMT, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > O rly? Resolution 800x600 while my display supports 1024x768
> > doesn't satisfy me.
>
>  That's bug (and probably already filed). 
Doesn't matter. I use xorg.conf.

> > Also, nv or nouveau drivers are not supporting my graphics card
> well.
> > And again, I can't set Digital Vibrance with them.
>
>  I was not saying that every cool feature of your card (especially
>  nVidia, ehm) will work out of the box, but it should at least
>  work somehow. And concerning nouveau -- the developers are my
>  heros, but it is still kind of alpha. 
They are not yet ready. But if they would be somehow "stable", I'm open 
for testing.

> > Another problem with xorg.conf? My display displays everything
> darker
> > than it is in reality, so I must to use gamma.
>
>  Probably bug. File it. 
No, it's my display's failure. Nothing wrong from Xorg. That's another 
reason I have xorg.conf.

> > I like Compiz, I must enable some options.
>
>  I am not promising that out of the box without xorg.conf. 
I understand (; .

> > I want my video to my bright as desktop, so I must to enable GL
> for XvMC.
>
>  Your configuration choice. We are not good in mind-reading. 
It's impossible to know such things (; .

> > I must to set DisplaySize to get good DPI (it was broken some
> months ago
> > to be "proper", but it's not).
>
>  The same, but if it is regression (i.e., it did work without
>  xorg.conf) than it might be a bug. 
It's popular bug, maybe in Xorg, maybe in GNOME or maybe in DejaVu fonts 
family.

DejaVu @ 10px are HUGE, BIG, while Lucida Grande for example is smaller.

[Kelly Miller]

On 2/28/08, Matej Cepl <mcepl(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On 2008-02-28, 05:45 GMT, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  > Sometimes I have broken xorg.conf and no copy on Internet so
>  > then some tool is needed.
>
>  Since FC6 everything Should Work™ even without any
>  /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever.
>
>  Matěj 
Not so; I know for a fact that a Synaptics Touchpad will not work
unless there's an entry in xorg.conf for it.  There are probably
others as well.

[Jesse Keating]

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 11:08:33 -0500
"Kelly Miller" <lightsolphoenix(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Not so; I know for a fact that a Synaptics Touchpad will not work
>  unless there's an entry in xorg.conf for it.  There are probably
>  others as well. 
There is a plan to remove that need in place.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?

[Callum Lerwick]

On Thu, 2008-02-28 at 11:08 -0500, Kelly Miller wrote:
>  Not so; I know for a fact that a Synaptics Touchpad will not work
>  unless there's an entry in xorg.conf for it.  There are probably
>  others as well. 
Don't forget ALPS. Which is handled by the synaptics driver but does NOT
work out of the box, as synaptics pads have an order of magnitude or two
better precision than ALPS pads, and it completely throws everything out
of whack. It doesn't just scale up the ALPS values to match synaptics so
that things Just Work. Nope. At least this was true last I looked at
it...

They're crap but they're common on lower end laptops.

[Trond Danielsen]

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Kelly Miller <lightsolphoenix(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On 2/28/08, Matej Cepl <mcepl(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>   > On 2008-02-28, 05:45 GMT, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>   > > Sometimes I have broken xorg.conf and no copy on Internet so
>   > > then some tool is needed.
>   >
>   > Since FC6 everything Should Work™ even without any
>   > /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever.
>   >
>   > Matěj
>
>   Not so; I know for a fact that a Synaptics Touchpad will not work
>   unless there's an entry in xorg.conf for it.  There are probably
>   others as well. 
I've had Synaptics on three laptops (Dell Inspiron 8100, Asus S5A and
Lenovo ThinkPad T61p), and the touchpad work on all of them. The
SHMConfig option is only needed to access additional configuration
options, but basic functionality is available without any
modifications to xorg.conf.

-- 
Trond Danielsen

[Matej Cepl]

On 2008-02-29, 09:23 GMT, Trond Danielsen wrote:
>  The SHMConfig option is only needed to access additional 
>  configuration options, but basic functionality is available 
>  without any modifications to xorg.conf. 
Just to note that SHMConfig is explicitly WONTFIX — developers 
don’t like it because of its terrible security implications.

Matěj

[Callum Lerwick]

On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 15:19 +0100, Matej Cepl wrote:
>  On 2008-02-29, 09:23 GMT, Trond Danielsen wrote:
>  > The SHMConfig option is only needed to access additional 
>  > configuration options, but basic functionality is available 
>  > without any modifications to xorg.conf.
>  
>  Just to note that SHMConfig is explicitly WONTFIX — developers 
>  don’t like it because of its terrible security implications. 
Well, we need the functionality *somehow*. If SHMConfig is insecure,
then we really need to find another way to do it...

[Jesse Keating]

On Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:37:59 -0600
Callum Lerwick <seg(a)haxxed.com&gt; wrote:

>  Well, we need the functionality *somehow*. If SHMConfig is insecure,
>  then we really need to find another way to do it... 

Which is planned.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?

[Horst H. von Brand]

Trond Danielsen <trond.danielsen(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Kelly Miller
> <lightsolphoenix(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > On 2/28/08, Matej Cepl <mcepl(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  >  > On 2008-02-28, 05:45 GMT, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  >  > > Sometimes I have broken xorg.conf and no copy on Internet so
>  >  > > then some tool is needed.
>  >  > Since FC6 everything Should Work™ even without any
>  >  > /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever. 
>  >  Not so; I know for a fact that a Synaptics Touchpad will not
> work
>  >  unless there's an entry in xorg.conf for it.  There are probably
>  >  others as well.
>  
>  I've had Synaptics on three laptops (Dell Inspiron 8100, Asus S5A and
>  Lenovo ThinkPad T61p), and the touchpad work on all of them. The
>  SHMConfig option is only needed to access additional configuration
>  options, but basic functionality is available without any
>  modifications to xorg.conf. 
Here (Toshiba Tecra with both a nipple among the keys and a touchpad) the
touchpad doesn't work at all. Not too bad in my case, as I tend to swipe
over it when typing (with mostly unpleasant results), and I use an external
mouse in any case. The nipple works (but is rather useless with only 2
buttons).
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                   User #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                    Fono: [phone]
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria             [phone]
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile               Fax:  [phone]

[Andrew Farris]

Christopher Aillon wrote:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
> > descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>  
>  Maybe we should make things just work out of the box where we can, so we 
>  can get rid of the need to have system-config-* cruft and discriminate 
>  against both. 
Jakub, I really have to disagree with your frequent use of the word 
'discriminate' in describing this issue.. there is no discrimination occurring 
here.  To be discrimination, it would have to be possible for you to do 
something (or be provided something) only in one situation and not in another. 
You CAN use the system-config- tools in kde, and they do their jobs correctly. 
It would be a discrimination issue if you were forced to login to gnome to 
create new user accounts for instance.

You might receive more positive feedback on this if you just stick to the 
primary issue... users who prefer KDE want their applications to remain in 
theme, especially if they are using vastly different QT themes from the default. 
  The 'problem' here is purely aesthetic, but there is nothing (in 
system-config- stuff) you're denied access to by using kde.

-- 
Andrew Farris <lordmorgul(a)gmail.com&gt; www.lordmorgul.net
  gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3
No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer
----                                                                       ----

[Arthur Pemberton]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 6:07 PM, Andrew Farris <lordmorgul(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>   You might receive more positive feedback on this if you just stick
> to the
>   primary issue... users who prefer KDE want their applications to remain in
>   theme, especially if they are using vastly different QT themes from the default.
>    The 'problem' here is purely aesthetic, but there is nothing (in
>   system-config- stuff) you're denied access to by using kde. 
Some users


-- 
Fedora 7 : sipping some of that moonshine
( www.pembo13.com )

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Christopher Aillon pisze:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
> > descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>
>  Maybe we should make things just work out of the box where we can, so we
>  can get rid of the need to have system-config-* cruft and discriminate
>  against both.
>  
Someone said here about GNOME config tools backend, which is 
"desktop-agnostic". Only KDE frontend is missing but it should not be a 
problem.

Also, including GNOME's tools instead of our, would make Ubuntu users 
switch easier (many are moving to Fedora).

[Kelly Miller]

Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  hi,
>
>  I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>  descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>
>  YaST authors separated UI library, so you [Red Hat or Community] can
>  easily rewrite our tools to integrate well with KDE and GTK-based
>  environments.
>
>  http://visnov.blogspot.com/2008/02/yast-user-interface-library-is-now.htm 
Um, have
you SEEN or USED the YaST GTK+ interface?  It's one of the most 
screwed-up pieces of bad UI I've ever seen in my life...

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Kelly Miller pisze:
>  Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> > hi,
> >
> > I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
> > descriminate KDE by using GTK.
> >
> > YaST authors separated UI library, so you [Red Hat or Community] can
> > easily rewrite our tools to integrate well with KDE and GTK-based
> > environments.
> >
> > http://visnov.blogspot.com/2008/02/yast-user-interface-library-is-now.htm
>  Um, have you SEEN or USED the YaST GTK+ interface? It's one of the most
>  screwed-up pieces of bad UI I've ever seen in my life...
>  
I've seen it and used it. Fast, responsible and very user friendly.

YaST-GTK is much better than YaST-Qt.

[Kelly Miller]

On 2/28/08, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek <jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Kelly Miller pisze:
>  > Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
>  >> hi,
>  >>
>  >> I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
>  >> descriminate KDE by using GTK.
>  >>
>  >> YaST authors separated UI library, so you [Red Hat or Community] can
>  >> easily rewrite our tools to integrate well with KDE and GTK-based
>  >> environments.
>  >>
>  >> http://visnov.blogspot.com/2008/02/yast-user-interface-library-is-now.htm
>  > Um, have you SEEN or USED the YaST GTK+ interface? It's one of the most
>  > screwed-up pieces of bad UI I've ever seen in my life...
>  >
>
>  I've seen it and used it. Fast, responsible and very user friendly.
>
>  YaST-GTK is much better than YaST-Qt. 
You're joking, right?  I mean, two minutes with YaST-GTK and I'd
already gotten sick of the fact that it acts like just about
everything else in Gnome anymore; that the user should only be able to
reach the minimum of options and anything else should be buried.

And it's a fact that the GTK installer is utterly brain-dead.

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Kelly Miller pisze:
>  On 2/28/08, Jakub 'Livio'
> Rusinek<jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com>  wrote:
> > Kelly Miller pisze:
> >> Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek wrote:
> >>> hi,
> >>>
> >>> I said few weeks or months ago, that our system-* tools cannot
> >>> descriminate KDE by using GTK.
> >>>
> >>> YaST authors separated UI library, so you [Red Hat or Community] can
> >>> easily rewrite our tools to integrate well with KDE and GTK-based
> >>> environments.
> >>>
> >>> http://visnov.blogspot.com/2008/02/yast-user-interface-library-is-now.htm
> >> Um, have you SEEN or USED the YaST GTK+ interface? It's one of the most
> >> screwed-up pieces of bad UI I've ever seen in my life...
> >>
> > I've seen it and used it. Fast, responsible and very user friendly.
> >
> > YaST-GTK is much better than YaST-Qt.
>
>  You're joking, right? 
No, I'm not. From users point, YaST-GTK is more readable and better 
organized.

>   I mean, two minutes with YaST-GTK and I'd
>  already gotten sick of the fact that it acts like just about
>  everything else in Gnome anymore; that the user should only be able to
>  reach the minimum of options and anything else should be buried. 
You use KDE, right?

>  And it's a fact that the GTK installer is utterly brain-dead.
>  
Don't be rude... Most of people do not require LOAD of options, but they 
expect simple "just works", without hassle.

[Bill Crawford]

On 28/02/2008, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek <jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Kelly Miller pisze: 
>   > You're joking, right? 
>  No, I'm not. From users point, YaST-GTK is more readable and
> better
>   organized. 
>   >  I mean, two minutes with YaST-GTK and I'd
>   > already gotten sick of the fact that it acts like just about
>   > everything else in Gnome anymore; that the user should only be able to
>   > reach the minimum of options and anything else should be buried. 
>  You use KDE, right? 
As do I. You have a problem with KDE, right? It's bad? It offers
options and you think that people don't want options => must not allow
configuration?

>   > And it's a fact that the GTK installer is utterly
> brain-dead. 
>  Don't be rude... Most of people do not require LOAD of options,
> but they
>   expect simple "just works", without hassle. 
I find it rude that you're suggesting that having options => doesn't
"just work". You could have the same behaviour as "default" but let
people change it; having sane defaults is not the same as refusing to
accept people won't always like *your* defaults. This *is* fairly
common with GTk / GNOME based applications (and it seems to be a trend
throughout that particular stack / framework / whatever you want to
call it). It's extremely frustrating.

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

Bill Crawford pisze:
>  On 28/02/2008, Jakub 'Livio'
> Rusinek<jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com>  wrote:
> > Kelly Miller pisze:
>
> >   >  You're joking, right?
>
> > No, I'm not. From users point, YaST-GTK is more readable and better
> >   organized.
>
> >   >   I mean, two minutes with YaST-GTK and I'd
> >   >  already gotten sick of the fact that it acts like just about
> >   >  everything else in Gnome anymore; that the user should only be able to
> >   >  reach the minimum of options and anything else should be buried.
>
> > You use KDE, right?
>
>  As do I. You have a problem with KDE, right? It's bad? It offers
>  options and you think that people don't want options =>  must not allow
>  configuration? 
KDE users think that many options, with clutter in UI are good, but they 
even do not use them and do not need them.

Believe, I was KDE user, who switched in search of something better.

> >   >  And it's a fact that the GTK installer is utterly
> brain-dead.
>
> > Don't be rude... Most of people do not require LOAD of options, but they
> >   expect simple "just works", without hassle.
>
>  I find it rude that you're suggesting that having options =>  doesn't
>  "just work". 
Did I said this? No. You, KDE people always brag something.

>  It's extremely frustrating. 
If do not use something, then be silent.



And about system-* tools for KDE - KDE version can have more options as 
you will "need" them.

[Bill Crawford]

On 29/02/2008, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek <jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Bill Crawford pisze: 
>  KDE users think that many options, with clutter in UI are good, but
> they
>   even do not use them and do not need them. 
You're presumably that "liking to have options" => "like to have UI
look cluttered".

You are assuming that because you do not use all the options => that
noone else will use them.

You are assuming that because [random person] uses no options, that
none of them are necessary.

>   Believe, I was KDE user, who switched in search of something better.
Believe what? It makes no difference to what I need.

>  Did I said this? No. You, KDE people always brag something. 
Where? I do not remember "bragging" about anything, merely pointing
out the irrational hatred of KDE and its users.

>   If do not use something, then be silent. 
Which seems to imply you should stop making comments and judgements about KDE.

>   And about system-* tools for KDE - KDE version can have more options
> as
>   you will "need" them. 
You miss the point, again - you make this comment about "not using
something" and being silent, but in the case of most of the system
config tools, there *is* no choice until KDE implements a replacement
... and sometimes, that replacement lags behind the "mainstream" tool.
You might want to pause for thought before you suggest that this
implies we should not replace them ... you might otherwise use Windows
instead of GNOME ;o)

[Robert 'Bob' Jensen]

Bill Crawford wrote:
>  On 29/02/2008, Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek
> <jakub.rusinek(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> > Bill Crawford pisze:
>  
> > KDE users think that many options, with clutter in UI are good, but they
> >  even do not use them and do not need them.
>  
>  You're presumably that "liking to have options" => "like to have
> UI
>  look cluttered".
>  
>  You are assuming that because you do not use all the options => that
>  noone else will use them.
>  
>  You are assuming that because [random person] uses no options, that
>  none of them are necessary.
>  
> >  Believe, I was KDE user, who switched in search of something better.
>  
>  Believe what? It makes no difference to what I need.
>  
> > Did I said this? No. You, KDE people always brag something.
>  
>  Where? I do not remember "bragging" about anything, merely pointing
>  out the irrational hatred of KDE and its users.
>  
> >  If do not use something, then be silent.
>  
>  Which seems to imply you should stop making comments and judgements about KDE.
>  
> >  And about system-* tools for KDE - KDE version can have more options as
> >  you will "need" them.
>  
>  You miss the point, again - you make this comment about "not using
>  something" and being silent, but in the case of most of the system
>  config tools, there *is* no choice until KDE implements a replacement
>  ... and sometimes, that replacement lags behind the "mainstream" tool.
>  You might want to pause for thought before you suggest that this
>  implies we should not replace them ... you might otherwise use Windows
>  instead of GNOME ;o)
>   
Come on Bill,

Look at the history of this poster, he is a troll and he is good at it. 
The more you people reply to his garbage the more he gets to play.

Join me in Boycotting all threads started by Jakob and by not responding 
when he is forced to start hijacking other people's threads.

-- 
73,

Robert 'Bob' Jensen
KC0WYC
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BobJensen
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIG/AmateurRadio
http://bjensen.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/hams/
http://lists.fedoraunity.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-hams

[Bill Crawford]

On 29/02/2008, Robert 'Bob' Jensen <bob(a)fedoraunity.org&gt; wrote:

>  Come on Bill,
>
>   Look at the history of this poster, he is a troll and he is good at it.
>   The more you people reply to his garbage the more he gets to play. 
You may be right, I think.

>   Join me in Boycotting all threads started by Jakob and by not
> responding
>   when he is forced to start hijacking other people's threads. 
Y'know, there was me thinking I'd dealt with it *really well* LOL.

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

On 29/02/2008, Robert 'Bob' Jensen<bob(a)fedoraunity.org>  wrote:
> > Come on Bill,
> >
> >   Look at the history of this poster, he is a troll and he is good at it.
> >   The more you people reply to his garbage the more he gets to play. 
And last, I'm not a troll!

[Jakub 'Livio' Rusinek]

>  Come on Bill,
>
>  Look at the history of this poster, he is a troll and he is good at it.
>  The more you people reply to his garbage the more he gets to play.
>
>  Join me in Boycotting all threads started by Jakob and by not responding
>  when he is forced to start hijacking other people's threads. 
First, I'm Jakub, not Jakob, as I'm a Pole, not a German.

And second, I didn't started being rude. I proposed changeing UI.