Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop

[Jaroslav Reznik]

= Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop

Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;

This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop interface from 
Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is more 
familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell interface, 
while being built from Gnome 3 components. 

== Detailed description ==
The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional desktop 
interfaces on both Linux and Windows. While it is good that there is research 
into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a traditional 
interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or 
impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome Shell vs. a 
more traditional interface. I'm not trying to start (or continue) a flame war 
here, so I won't state any of my own criticisms of Gnome Shell here, but I 
will observe that a number of very high profile people in the Linux community, 
such as Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox, have publicly announce that due to 
problems with Gnome Shell they are switching to a different desktop and/or 
Linux distribution.

I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new Fedora 
install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome Shell if 
they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a traditional 
desktop.

The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based on the 
latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate for a 
default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components. 
_______________________________________________
devel-announce mailing list
devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce

[Álvaro Castillo]

I don't think Cinnamon as default desktop. Fedora always was of GNOME by
default Desktop. However, I have to choose, I would choose KDE as default
desktop.


On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>
>  Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
>
>  This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop interface from
>  Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is more
>  familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell
>  interface,
>  while being built from Gnome 3 components.
>
>  == Detailed description ==
>  The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
>  desktop
>  interfaces on both Linux and Windows. While it is good that there is
>  research
>  into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a traditional
>  interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or
>  impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome Shell
>  vs. a
>  more traditional interface. I'm not trying to start (or continue) a flame
>  war
>  here, so I won't state any of my own criticisms of Gnome Shell here, but I
>  will observe that a number of very high profile people in the Linux
>  community,
>  such as Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox, have publicly announce that due to
>  problems with Gnome Shell they are switching to a different desktop and/or
>  Linux distribution.
>
>  I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new Fedora
>  install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome Shell
>  if
>  they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>  traditional
>  desktop.
>
>  The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based on
>  the
>  latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate for a
>  default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel-announce mailing list
>  devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 



-- 
Álvaro Castillo

Fedora Project, EMEA ambassador
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Netsys
Linux user #547784

[Jaroslav Reznik]

----- Original Message -----
>  
>  
>  I don't think Cinnamon as default desktop. Fedora always was of GNOME
>  by default Desktop. However, I have to choose, I would choose KDE as
>  default desktop. 
> From the times Kevin proposed Plasma as default desktop - and the rest
of KDE SIG did not support it - it's mainly about resources. And not
only packaging ones, also development (to make sure desktop works on
top of our base system layer - and you know, Fedora is often first)
but documentation (yeah, someone has to write documentation), artwork
and all other teams I forgot to mention (sorry ;-).

Btw. Board is trying to find the way how to avoid that strict 
"something is default" - do you know based on this definition Compiz
should be part of our default offering [1]?

And the last thing - GNOME is coming with so called "classic" UI -
see GNOME 3.8 feature page (I announced a few minutes ago) [2].

"Fallback mode is going away in 3.8. Instead, there will be a set of
supported extensions that is grouped together in a 'classic' mode,
which provides a more GNOME 2-like user experience"

Same tries Cinnamon but as a fork. Make your own conclusion ;-)

Jaroslav

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Default_offering
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Gnome3.8

>  
>  
>  
>  On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik < jreznik(a)redhat.com
>  > wrote:
>  
>  
>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>  
>  Feature owner(s): Eric Smith < eric(a)brouhaha.com >
>  
>  This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop
>  interface from
>  Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is
>  more
>  familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell
>  interface,
>  while being built from Gnome 3 components.
>  
>  == Detailed description ==
>  The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
>  desktop
>  interfaces on both Linux and Windows. While it is good that there is
>  research
>  into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a
>  traditional
>  interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult
>  or
>  impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome
>  Shell vs. a
>  more traditional interface. I'm not trying to start (or continue) a
>  flame war
>  here, so I won't state any of my own criticisms of Gnome Shell here,
>  but I
>  will observe that a number of very high profile people in the Linux
>  community,
>  such as Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox, have publicly announce that due
>  to
>  problems with Gnome Shell they are switching to a different desktop
>  and/or
>  Linux distribution.
>  
>  I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
>  Fedora
>  install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome
>  Shell if
>  they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>  traditional
>  desktop.
>  
>  The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based
>  on the
>  latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate
>  for a
>  default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel-announce mailing list
>  devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  
>  
>  --
>  Álvaro Castillo
>  
>  Fedora Project, EMEA ambassador
>  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Netsys
>  Linux user #547784
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

I love GNOME 3 and detest KDE 4. I've tried MATE and Cinnamon on both
Linux Mint and Fedora and don't really see the point of either of them
as long as GNOME 3 offers fallback mode.

When you come right down to it, nearly all Linux desktops can be
easily customized to provide a Windows-like workflow (menu at lower
left, panel at bottom) or a Mac-like workflow (menu at upper left,
panel at top). All the major Linux desktops can do this. I've even
done this with OpenBox and fbpanel.

Personally I think the "Default Linux desktop" ought to *be* OpenBox
and fbpanel - it would get the media sizes and RAM use back down to
something sane. ;-) I spend most of my time in either the browser, a
terminal or a GUI application like RStudio, LibreOffice or GIMP.
That's all a Linux desktop needs, really - a browser, a terminal app
and a menu/panel/taskbar/tray/clock/wifi/sound/weather app gizmo.

You *do* need a good terminal app - I'd pick gnome-terminal over
konsole or lxterminal or the XFCE terminal if I had a choice but I
could live with any of them. Xterm is even acceptable if you have a
3-button mouse. ;-) But other than that, an awful lot of the
"innovation" in Linux desktops seems to me to be wasted effort.

On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  ----- Original Message -----
> >
> >
> > I don't think Cinnamon as default desktop. Fedora always was of GNOME
> > by default Desktop. However, I have to choose, I would choose KDE as
> > default desktop.
>
>  From the times Kevin proposed Plasma as default desktop - and the rest
>  of KDE SIG did not support it - it's mainly about resources. And not
>  only packaging ones, also development (to make sure desktop works on
>  top of our base system layer - and you know, Fedora is often first)
>  but documentation (yeah, someone has to write documentation), artwork
>  and all other teams I forgot to mention (sorry ;-).
>
>  Btw. Board is trying to find the way how to avoid that strict
>  "something is default" - do you know based on this definition Compiz
>  should be part of our default offering [1]?
>
>  And the last thing - GNOME is coming with so called "classic" UI -
>  see GNOME 3.8 feature page (I announced a few minutes ago) [2].
>
>  "Fallback mode is going away in 3.8. Instead, there will be a set of
>  supported extensions that is grouped together in a 'classic' mode,
>  which provides a more GNOME 2-like user experience"
>
>  Same tries Cinnamon but as a fork. Make your own conclusion ;-)
>
>  Jaroslav
>
>  [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Default_offering
>  [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Gnome3.8
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik < jreznik(a)redhat.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> >
> > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
> >
> > Feature owner(s): Eric Smith < eric(a)brouhaha.com >
> >
> > This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop
> > interface from
> > Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is
> > more
> > familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell
> > interface,
> > while being built from Gnome 3 components.
> >
> > == Detailed description ==
> > The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
> > desktop
> > interfaces on both Linux and Windows. While it is good that there is
> > research
> > into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a
> > traditional
> > interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult
> > or
> > impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome
> > Shell vs. a
> > more traditional interface. I'm not trying to start (or continue) a
> > flame war
> > here, so I won't state any of my own criticisms of Gnome Shell here,
> > but I
> > will observe that a number of very high profile people in the Linux
> > community,
> > such as Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox, have publicly announce that due
> > to
> > problems with Gnome Shell they are switching to a different desktop
> > and/or
> > Linux distribution.
> >
> > I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
> > Fedora
> > install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome
> > Shell if
> > they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
> > traditional
> > desktop.
> >
> > The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based
> > on the
> > latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate
> > for a
> > default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
> > _______________________________________________
> > devel-announce mailing list
> > devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
> >
> > --
> > Álvaro Castillo
> >
> > Fedora Project, EMEA ambassador
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Netsys
> > Linux user #547784
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 


-- 
Twitter: http://twitter.com/znmeb; Computational Journalism Publishers
Workbench: http://znmeb.github.com/Computational-Journalism-Publishers-Workbench/

How the Hell can the lion sleep with all those people singing "A weem
oh way!" at the top of their lungs?

[Christopher Meng]

Well, maybe the result is nobody will support openbox as default.

Your words make me think why users hate Linux desktops... :)

[Dan Mashal]

On Sunday, January 27, 2013, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

>  I love GNOME 3 and detest KDE 4. I've tried MATE and Cinnamon on
> both
>  Linux Mint and Fedora and don't really see the point of either of them
>  as long as GNOME 3 offers fallback mode.
>
>  When you come right down to it, nearly all Linux desktops can be
>  easily customized to provide a Windows-like workflow (menu at lower
>  left, panel at bottom) or a Mac-like workflow (menu at upper left,
>  panel at top). All the major Linux desktops can do this. I've even
>  done this with OpenBox and fbpanel.
>
>  Personally I think the "Default Linux desktop" ought to *be* OpenBox
>  and fbpanel - it would get the media sizes and RAM use back down to
>  something sane. ;-) I spend most of my time in either the browser, a
>  terminal or a GUI application like RStudio, LibreOffice or GIMP.
>  That's all a Linux desktop needs, really - a browser, a terminal app
>  and a menu/panel/taskbar/tray/clock/wifi/sound/weather app gizmo.
>
>  You *do* need a good terminal app - I'd pick gnome-terminal over
>  konsole or lxterminal or the XFCE terminal if I had a choice but I
>  could live with any of them. Xterm is even acceptable if you have a
>  3-button mouse. ;-) But other than that, an awful lot of the
>  "innovation" in Linux desktops seems to me to be wasted effort.
>
>  On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  wrote:
>  > ----- Original Message -----
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> I don't think Cinnamon as default desktop. Fedora always was of GNOME
>  >> by default Desktop. However, I have to choose, I would choose KDE as
>  >> default desktop.
>  >
>  > From the times Kevin proposed Plasma as default desktop - and the rest
>  > of KDE SIG did not support it - it's mainly about resources. And not
>  > only packaging ones, also development (to make sure desktop works on
>  > top of our base system layer - and you know, Fedora is often first)
>  > but documentation (yeah, someone has to write documentation), artwork
>  > and all other teams I forgot to mention (sorry ;-).
>  >
>  > Btw. Board is trying to find the way how to avoid that strict
>  > "something is default" - do you know based on this definition Compiz
>  > should be part of our default offering [1]?
>  >
>  > And the last thing - GNOME is coming with so called "classic" UI -
>  > see GNOME 3.8 feature page (I announced a few minutes ago) [2].
>  >
>  > "Fallback mode is going away in 3.8. Instead, there will be a set of
>  > supported extensions that is grouped together in a 'classic' mode,
>  > which provides a more GNOME 2-like user experience"
>  >
>  > Same tries Cinnamon but as a fork. Make your own conclusion ;-)
>  >
>  > Jaroslav
>  >
>  > [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Default_offering
>  > [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Gnome3.8
>  >
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik < jreznik(a)redhat.com
>  >> > wrote:
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>  >>
>  >> Feature owner(s): Eric Smith < eric(a)brouhaha.com >
>  >>
>  >> This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop
>  >> interface from
>  >> Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is
>  >> more
>  >> familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell
>  >> interface,
>  >> while being built from Gnome 3 components.
>  >>
>  >> == Detailed description ==
>  >> The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
>  >> desktop
>  >> interfaces on both Linux and Windows. While it is good that there is
>  >> research
>  >> into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a
>  >> traditional
>  >> interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult
>  >> or
>  >> impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome
>  >> Shell vs. a
>  >> more traditional interface. I'm not trying to start (or continue) a
>  >> flame war
>  >> here, so I won't state any of my own criticisms of Gnome Shell here,
>  >> but I
>  >> will observe that a number of very high profile people in the Linux
>  >> community,
>  >> such as Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox, have publicly announce that due
>  >> to
>  >> problems with Gnome Shell they are switching to a different desktop
>  >> and/or
>  >> Linux distribution.
>  >>
>  >> I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
>  >> Fedora
>  >> install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome
>  >> Shell if
>  >> they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>  >> traditional
>  >> desktop.
>  >>
>  >> The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based
>  >> on the
>  >> latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate
>  >> for a
>  >> default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>  >> _______________________________________________
>  >> devel-announce mailing list
>  >> devel-announce(a)lists.--
>  Twitter: http://twitter.com/znmeb; Computational Journalism Publishers
>  Workbench:
>  http://znmeb.github.com/Computational-Journalism-Publishers-Workbench/
>
>  How the Hell can the lion sleep with all those people singing "A weem
>  oh way!" at the top of their lungs?
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org <javascript:;>
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 

You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play with
them 5 minutes?

Dan

[Máirín Duffy]

On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you
> play with
>  them 5 minutes? 
Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'

Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?

http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...

It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis that
Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
requires just a bit more research and reason than that.

~m

[Jon Ciesla]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;wrote:

>  On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play with
>  > them 5 minutes?
>
>  Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
>  are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
>  forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
>
>  Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
>  Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
>  remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
>  shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
>
>  http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...
>
>  It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis that
>  Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
>  typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
>  the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
>  requires just a bit more research and reason than that.
>  
This.  A lot.

-J


>  ~m
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 



-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/
------------------------------------------------
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

[Peter Robinson]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
> > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play with
> > them 5 minutes?
>
>  Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
>  are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
>  forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
>
>  Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
>  Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
>  remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
>  shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
>
>  http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...
>
>  It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis that
>  Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
>  typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
>  the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
>  requires just a bit more research and reason than that. 
I agree. Linus as a side cycled through KDE, XFCE and is back to gnome
with one of the recent releases.

The gnome desktop certainly isn't perfect but I see a lot more users
using it than most of the rest of the other options. I don't believe
the "no one uses it so we should change" has much credence and while
some people have moved to something else and stayed there I think a
lot more more have tried others and come back when they realise that
all desktops have their issues and it's often a case of "better the
devil you know...." but it would be nicer if the gnome team actually
initiated a feedback loop with Fedora about some of the issues too.

Peter

[Eric Smith]

On 01/28/2013 09:27 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>  The gnome desktop certainly isn't perfect but I see a lot more
> users 
>  using it than most of the rest of the other options. 
That's selection bias.  It's the default, so of course it's going to get 
more users.  That doesn't necessarily mean that they like it more than 
alternatives.

The fact that GNOME is working on a "classic mode" in and of itself 
demonstrates that someone has finally realized that not all users want a 
tablet-style interface for their desktop.  However, we unfortunately 
don't have any hard quantitative information about what users want.

I based my proposal on having watched several moderately experienced 
computer users struggle with Gnome Shell and complain that it was more 
difficult for them to use than what they were accustomed to.  I realize 
that this is only anecdotal evidence, and that there reportedly are 
other users that found Gnome Shell to be easier to use.

>  I don't believe the "no one uses it so we should
> change" has much credence 
I agree, and certainly didn't make that argument in the proposal.

>  but it would be nicer if the gnome team actually initiated a feedback
>
>  loop with Fedora about some of the issues too.  
That would be great.

Eric

[inode0]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
> > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play with
> > them 5 minutes?
>
>  Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
>  are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
>  forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
>
>  Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
>  Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
>  remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
>  shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
>
>  http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...
There are lots of reasons to not choose a desktop as the default and
lacking a demonstrable history of dedication and success is among
them.

>  It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis
> that
>  Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
>  typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
>  the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
>  requires just a bit more research and reason than that. 
A couple of observations here. UI experts aren't the target audience
of the default desktop either and while I agree that we need very
clear reasons for switching I don't accept that we have used X for 10
years as a reason to not change it.

What concerns me isn't that Linus and Alan don't like it. What
concerns me is where about 2 million of our users went after F14.

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics#Total_repository_connections

There are probably a number of reasons why people stopped using Fedora
at that time and what we can do to recover isn't at all clear. Even if
they all left because of dislike of the default desktop (which surely
isn't the case) changing it now won't bring them back.

I'm happy to see renewed discussion about the future of the Fedora
desktop. After four releases it isn't bad to step back and take a look
at how things are working out. I hope we can do that with an eye to
where we want to go in the future rather than looking to the past.

John

[Pete Travis]

On Jan 28, 2013 9:56 AM, "inode0" <inode0(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  
(snip)

> I'm happy to see renewed discussion about the future of the Fedora
> desktop. After four releases it isn't bad to step back and take a look
> at how things are working out. I hope we can do that with an eye to
> where we want to go in the future rather than looking to the past.
>  
> John
> --

This seems like the most productive track we can follow. As a downstream
consumer of GNOME, what can the Fedora Project do to address or remedy user
dissatisfaction with our default DE? If the answer is 'nothing, we just
have to accept what they ship' then there isn't much to say. If there is
room for a feedback loop, what would it look like?

--Pete

[Allan Day]

Hey Pete,

Pete Travis <lists(a)petetravis.com&gt; wrote:
> > I'm happy to see renewed discussion about the future of the
> Fedora
> > desktop. After four releases it isn't bad to step back and take a look
> > at how things are working out. I hope we can do that with an eye to
> > where we want to go in the future rather than looking to the past.
> >
> > John
> > --
>
>  This seems like the most productive track we can follow. As a downstream
>  consumer of GNOME, what can the Fedora Project do to address or remedy user
>  dissatisfaction with our default DE? If the answer is 'nothing, we just have
>  to accept what they ship' then there isn't much to say. If there is room for
>  a feedback loop, what would it look like?
>
>  --Pete 
Fedora contributors already participate in GNOME (and are fantastic),
and others are welcome. The ideal feedback loop is people working with
GNOME to improve the experience (not just coding, but helping to
identify bugs and develop solutions) - that's what upstream
development is all about.

Allan
--
IRC:  aday on irc.gnome.org
Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/

[Máirín Duffy]

On 01/28/2013 11:56 AM, inode0 wrote:
>  What concerns me isn't that Linus and Alan don't like it.
To be fair Linus (more quietly) went back to GNOME 3 after his initial
loud complaints. He is still using it since he just posted that he was
to G+ yesterday.

~m

[Gerald Henriksen]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:26:14 -0500, you wrote:

> On 01/28/2013 11:56 AM, inode0 wrote:
> > What concerns me isn't that Linus and Alan don't like it.
>
> To be fair Linus (more quietly) went back to GNOME 3 after his initial
> loud complaints. He is still using it since he just posted that he was
> to G+ yesterday. 
Which is likely more a statement about how poor the alternatives are
than a change of his views of Gnome 3.

While I wait to see what this new Gnome mode looks like, the choices
facing Linux users aren't great - either the desktop has gone off on
strange path (Gnome-shell), simply don't like (KDE) or lacks the
developer base to provide a suitable experience.

[Maros Zatko]

On 01/28/2013 06:49 PM, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
>  On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:26:14 -0500, you wrote:
>
> > On 01/28/2013 11:56 AM, inode0 wrote:
> >> What concerns me isn't that Linus and Alan don't like it.
> > To be fair Linus (more quietly) went back to GNOME 3 after his initial
> > loud complaints. He is still using it since he just posted that he was
> > to G+ yesterday.
>  Which is likely more a statement about how poor the alternatives are
>  than a change of his views of Gnome 3. 
exactly!
>  While I wait to see what this new Gnome mode looks like, the choices
>  facing Linux users aren't great - either the desktop has gone off on
>  strange path (Gnome-shell), simply don't like (KDE) or lacks the
>  developer base to provide a suitable experience.
>  
I've used gnome 2.x, when 3.x came out I had no other option
than to (finally) switch to tiling since my beloved DE was gone
and not going back.
Other "options" I've tried (XFCE was some of them) had either
some "child" issues or didn't satisfy my needs at all (no, can't
stand KDE either).

[Casey Dahlin]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 07:49:59PM +0100, Maros Zatko wrote:
>  I've used gnome 2.x, when 3.x came out I had no other option
>  than to (finally) switch to tiling since my beloved DE was gone
>  and not going back. 
If you're the sort of person that wants a tiling window manager, then I think
it's fair to ask you to install it yourself, thereby freeing up the default to
serve a different audience.

--CJD

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 19:49:59 +0100,
   Maros Zatko <mzatko(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> >
> I've used gnome 2.x, when 3.x came out I had no other option
> than to (finally) switch to tiling since my beloved DE was gone
> and not going back.
> Other "options" I've tried (XFCE was some of them) had either
> some "child" issues or didn't satisfy my needs at all (no, can't
> stand KDE either). 
Forced fallback mode still works through F18. I find it provides me what I 
want from gnome2. It will be almost certainly going away in F19 (but hasn't 
yet in rawhide), but there is talk of providing something similar via 
a gnome-shell extension.

[Michael Cronenworth]

Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>  Forced fallback mode still works through F18. I find it provides me
>  what I want from gnome2. It will be almost certainly going away in F19
>  (but hasn't yet in rawhide), but there is talk of providing something
>  similar via a gnome-shell extension.  
"Going away" isn't the correct phrase. The UI of Fallback Mode is going
to transition to a new feature called Classic Mode. It's an official
feature of Gnome 3.8.

http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/

[Máirín Duffy]

On Mon 28 Jan 2013 02:17:29 PM EST, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>  "Going away" isn't the correct phrase. The UI of
> Fallback Mode is going
>  to transition to a new feature called Classic Mode. It's an official
>  feature of Gnome 3.8.
>
>  http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/ 
Won't the new GNOME 3 classic mode effectively render Cinnamon, MATE, 
and friends obsolete?

~m

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 01/28/2013 07:27 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  On Mon 28 Jan 2013 02:17:29 PM EST, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> > "Going away" isn't the correct phrase. The UI of Fallback Mode is
> going
> > to transition to a new feature called Classic Mode. It's an official
> > feature of Gnome 3.8.
> >
> > http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/
>  Won't the new GNOME 3 classic mode effectively render Cinnamon, MATE,
>  and friends obsolete? 
I for one would expect all forks would to be rendered obsolete...

JBG

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 28 January 2013 12:27, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  On Mon 28 Jan 2013 02:17:29 PM EST, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
> > "Going away" isn't the correct phrase. The UI of Fallback Mode is
> going
> > to transition to a new feature called Classic Mode. It's an official
> > feature of Gnome 3.8.
> >
> > http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/
>
>  Won't the new GNOME 3 classic mode effectively render Cinnamon, MATE,
>  and friends obsolete? 
It will depend on whether people outside of the current GNOME use base
think so. If they do then the other forks will go away over 2-3 years
(usual timeframe for such things to work out). If it doesn't then no
they will not all go away. I mean Enlightenment, FVWM2 and even TWM
have sizable* usage bases.

* Sizable being over 200 people as at that size the group seems to
self-petuate indefinately as new people come in and old people go.



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
"Don't derail a useful feature for the 99% because you're not in it."
Linus Torvalds
"Years ago my mother used to say to me,... Elwood, you must be oh
so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I
recommend pleasant. You may quote me."  —James Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;wrote:


>  Won't the new GNOME 3 classic mode effectively render Cinnamon,
> MATE,
>  and friends obsolete?
>  
gnome-classic-session is in Rawhide and I expect it will satisfy some users
but not at all.  In particular,  there are people who can't get enough
performance out of software rendering in GNOME Shell and have to use
something like MATE for the time being.  Also,  while the UI in classic
session is quite similar, it isn't exactly the same (ex: workspaces,
applets etc).

Rahul

[Olav Vitters]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 02:27:42PM -0500, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  On Mon 28 Jan 2013 02:17:29 PM EST, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>  > "Going away" isn't the correct phrase. The UI of Fallback Mode is
> going
>  > to transition to a new feature called Classic Mode. It's an official
>  > feature of Gnome 3.8.
>  >
>  > http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/
>  
>  Won't the new GNOME 3 classic mode effectively render Cinnamon, MATE, 
>  and friends obsolete? 
It is not enough for all. Various people want the 2.32 version of e.g.
gnome-control-center and so on. This is partly why MATE became popular
despite that you could get the 2.x gnome-applets+gnome-panel experience
under fallback mode (didn't take much effort, but seemed like it was too
difficult to discover or something).

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Dan Mashal]

On Monday, January 28, 2013, Máirín Duffy wrote:

>  On Mon 28 Jan 2013 02:17:29 PM EST, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>  > "Going away" isn't the correct phrase. The UI of Fallback Mode is
> going
>  > to transition to a new feature called Classic Mode. It's an official
>  > feature of Gnome 3.8.
>  >
>  > http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/
>
>  Won't the new GNOME 3 classic mode effectively render Cinnamon, MATE,
>  and friends obsolete?
>
>  ~m
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org <javascript:;>
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 

Keep dreaming.

[Martin Sourada]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:27:42 -0500 
Máirín Duffy wrote:

>  On Mon 28 Jan 2013 02:17:29 PM EST, Michael Cronenworth wrote:
>  > "Going away" isn't the correct phrase. The UI of Fallback Mode is
>  > going to transition to a new feature called Classic Mode. It's an
>  > official feature of Gnome 3.8.
>  >
>  > http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/
>  
>  Won't the new GNOME 3 classic mode effectively render Cinnamon, MATE, 
>  and friends obsolete?
>   
It's "just" a set of extensions. We, who abandoned gnome when it
became
gnome shell, didn't so only because of the DE interface, but also
because removing features, forcing choices on you, arrogant
know-it-better-than-you devs etc. Just having two panels with applets
won't make me happy if it's littered with symbolic icons, just as much
as the gnome apps which are having with each new release less and less
(useful) features. 

I only wish those people hell bent on keeping forking gnome would
invest their time on improving the existing alternatives instead (XFCE
and LXDE), it makes more sense to me, as at least XFCE-4.10 isn't much
lacking and with a bit of tweaking even looks and behaves rather similar
when compared to gnome-2.32...

Martin

[Richard Marko]

On 01/28/2013 05:56 PM, inode0 wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics#Total_repository_connections 

I'm wondering if there was an effort to provide package usage statistics
for Fedora. Having such data might be valuable when there's a
disagreement of what is popular/widely used.

-- 
Richard Marko

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 06:45:10PM +0100, Richard Marko wrote:
>  On 01/28/2013 05:56 PM, inode0 wrote:
>  > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics#Total_repository_connections
>  
>  
>  I'm wondering if there was an effort to provide package usage statistics
>  for Fedora. Having such data might be valuable when there's a
>  disagreement of what is popular/widely used. 
We could just import Debian popcon.  It's free software after all ...

http://popcon.debian.org/

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows programs, test, and
build Windows installers. Over 100 libraries supported.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MinGW

[Rahul Sundaram]

On 01/28/2013 02:57 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
>  We could just import Debian popcon.  It's free software after all
> ...
>
>  http://popcon.debian.org/ 
You can't just import it.  openSUSE has a port that uses RPM but I don't 
know whats the status of that

Rahul

[Michael Scherer]

Le lundi 28 janvier 2013 à 18:45 +0100, Richard Marko a écrit :
>  On 01/28/2013 05:56 PM, inode0 wrote:
>  > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics#Total_repository_connections
>  
>  
>  I'm wondering if there was an effort to provide package usage statistics
>  for Fedora. Having such data might be valuable when there's a
>  disagreement of what is popular/widely used. 
Then, people will disagree on the bias of being installed by default, on
being required to work, etc, etc.

-- 
Michael Scherer

[Tom Callaway]

On 01/28/2013 12:45 PM, Richard Marko wrote:
>  On 01/28/2013 05:56 PM, inode0 wrote:
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics#Total_repository_connections
>  
>  
>  I'm wondering if there was an effort to provide package usage statistics
>  for Fedora. Having such data might be valuable when there's a
>  disagreement of what is popular/widely used. 
We are actually working on something to do this, but it is in a very
very early state (no code, rough ideas).

~tom

==
Fedora Project

[Eric Smith]

On 01/28/2013 09:56 AM, inode0 wrote:
>  After four releases it isn't bad to step back and take a look at
> how 
>  things are working out. I hope we can do that with an eye to where we 
>  want to go in the future rather than looking to the past. 
I couldn't have said it better.  I'm much more concerned about providing 
a good experience for Fedora users than about Cinnamon in particular.

Eric

[Dan Mashal]

On Monday, January 28, 2013, Máirín Duffy wrote:

>  On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play with
>  > them 5 minutes?
>
>  Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
>  are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
>  forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
>
>  Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
>  Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
>  remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
>  shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
>
>  http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...
>
>  It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis that
>  Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
>  typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
>  the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
>  requires just a bit more research and reason than that.
>
>  ~m 

Lets all listen to Miami because she did a great job with anaconda 18 UI
design, knows more than Linus, Alan Cox and is absolutely right on
everything!

Dan

[Dan Mashal]

On Tuesday, January 29, 2013, Dan Mashal wrote:

>  On Monday, January 28, 2013, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>
> > On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
> > > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play with
> > > them 5 minutes?
> >
> > Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
> > are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
> > forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
> >
> > Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
> > Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
> > remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
> > shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
> >
> > http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...
> >
> > It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis that
> > Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
> > typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
> > the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
> > requires just a bit more research and reason than that.
> >
> > ~m
>
>
>  Mizmo*

[Marcela Mašláňová]

On 01/29/2013 12:53 PM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  On Tuesday, January 29, 2013, Dan Mashal wrote:
>
>
>
>      On Monday, January 28, 2013, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>
>          On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>           > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you
>          play with
>           > them 5 minutes?
>
>          Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to
>          how there
>          are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,'
>          there were
>          forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
>
>          Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look
>          'em up.
>          Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody
>          seems to
>          remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
>          shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
>
>         
> http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...
>
>          It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis
>          that
>          Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts
>          or even
>          typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think
>          switching
>          the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18
>          releases
>          requires just a bit more research and reason than that.
>
>          ~m
>
>
>      Mizmo*
>
>
>  
Please stop. This discussion stopped to be helpful ~10 emails ago and 
you are not helping to make a consensus about this topic by personal 
attacks.

Marcela

[drago01]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:52 PM, Dan Mashal <dan.mashal(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Monday, January 28, 2013, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> >
> > On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
> > > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play with
> > > them 5 minutes?
> >
> > Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
> > are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
> > forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
> >
> > Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
> > Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
> > remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
> > shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
> >
> > http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...
> >
> > It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis that
> > Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
> > typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
> > the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
> > requires just a bit more research and reason than that.
> >
> > ~m
>
>
>  Lets all listen to Miami because she did a great job with anaconda 18 UI
>  design, knows more than Linus, Alan Cox and is absolutely right on
>  everything! 
Stop trolling please.

[Martin Sourada]

Hi Dan,

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 03:52:03 -0800 
Dan Mashal wrote:
>  
>  Lets all listen to Miami because she did a great job with anaconda 18
>  UI design, knows more than Linus, Alan Cox and is absolutely right on
>  everything!
>   
Now, as much as I strongly disagree with the UI changes anaconda made
in F18, I just as much loathe, maybe even more, getting personal in
technical discussion. You're going overboard, I strongly believe, with
this comment. Please calm down.

And now, while I'm at it -- something on topic:
-1 from me for Cinnamon. As much as I'd like to see something different
as our default desktop than Gnome Shell (which is, just as the new
Anaconda, going down the dumbing-down road where your PC is supposedly
more clever than you and knows better than you what you want), I don't
think it's wise to switch to something that has been only recently
imported into Fedora, has next to none history and does not have that
kind of strong developers' support (aka people working on it either
upstream or in Fedora) Gnome does.

When you've got a strong developer base, come back again and we can
consider it seriously.

Martin

[Jon Ciesla]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:52 AM, Dan Mashal <dan.mashal(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Monday, January 28, 2013, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>
> > On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
> > > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play with
> > > them 5 minutes?
> >
> > Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
> > are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
> > forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
> >
> > Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
> > Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
> > remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
> > shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
> >
> > http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&am...
> >
> > It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis that
> > Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
> > typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
> > the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
> > requires just a bit more research and reason than that.
> >
> > ~m
>
>
>  Lets all listen to Miami because she did a great job with anaconda 18 UI
>  design, knows more than Linus, Alan Cox and is absolutely right on
>  everything!
>
>  While I support your right to express disagreement, kindly do so without 
personal
attacks.

-J


>  Dan
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  


-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/
------------------------------------------------
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 03:52:03AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
>     On Monday, January 28, 2013, M�ir�n Duffy wrote:
>  
>       On 01/28/2013 02:06 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>       > You don't see the point of MATE or Cinnamon? How long did you play
>       with
>       > them 5 minutes?
>  
>       Do you remember the GNOME 1.x => 2.x transition? Similarly to how there
>       are forks of GNOME now to 'keep the GNOME 2 candle burning,' there were
>       forks of GNOME 1.x to 'keep the GNOME 1 candle burning.'
>  
>       Do you remember what they were called? I didn't; I had to look 'em up.
>       Do you ever wonder what happened to them? Dead projects nobody seems to
>       remember. Do we really want to switch to a desktop that history has
>       shown is likely to become a dead project in a few years?
>  
>      
> [1]http://osdir.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&...
>  
>       It also doesn't seem smart to switch from a desktop on the basis that
>       Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox - kernel developers, not UI experts or even
>       typical desktop users by any means - don't like it. I think switching
>       the desktop that has been our default for over 10 years and 18 releases
>       requires just a bit more research and reason than that.
>  
>       ~m
>  
>     Lets all listen to Miami because she did a great job with anaconda 18 UI
>     design,�knows more than Linus, Alan Cox and is absolutely right on
>     everything!�
>     Dan 
You are completely out of line here, please stop this or I'll ask the hall
monitor to take action.

Pierre

[Eric Smith]

On 01/28/2013 08:47 AM, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  I think switching the desktop that has been our default for over 10 
>  years and 18 releases requires just a bit more research and reason 
>  than that. ~m  
I don't disagree with the "more research and reason" part, but the 
current default desktop has only been "our default" for four releases, 
F15 through F18.  I don't recall any serious "research and reason" 
having been involved in the switch that occurred when F15 was being 
developed.  As far as I can tell, it was just thrust upon us without 
much consideration as to whether it was good, bad, or indifferent.  My 
proposal is at least only that, a proposal, and is not being thrust upon 
anyone without discussion and ultimately a vote.

Eric

[Máirín Duffy]

On 01/29/2013 04:59 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
>  I don't disagree with the "more research and reason"
> part, but the
>  current default desktop has only been "our default" for four releases,
>  F15 through F18.  I don't recall any serious "research and reason"
>  having been involved in the switch that occurred when F15 was being
>  developed.  As far as I can tell, it was just thrust upon us without
>  much consideration as to whether it was good, bad, or indifferent.   
Actually a lot of research and reason went into GNOME 3's development
[1], and we picked it up because we are an upstream distro [2]. So um,
no, there was no "thrusting" going on.

Again, you're gonna need better reasons than 'Alan Cox and Linus don't
like it' especially because Linus uses it...

~m

[1]
https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design#Research.2C_testing_and_validation

[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects

[Miloslav Trmač]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  On 01/29/2013 04:59 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
> > I don't disagree with the "more research and reason" part, but the
> > current default desktop has only been "our default" for four releases,
> > F15 through F18.  I don't recall any serious "research and reason"
> > having been involved in the switch that occurred when F15 was being
> > developed.  As far as I can tell, it was just thrust upon us without
> > much consideration as to whether it was good, bad, or indifferent.
>
>  Actually a lot of research and reason went into GNOME 3's development
>  [1], 
That's about as relevant as "a lot of coding went into
$project",
which is... not a whole lot when considering which project to make the
default.

>  and we picked it up because we are an upstream distro [2].
GNOME isn't the only possible upstream.  We picked it up at that time
implicitly because it was presented as an upgrade instead of basically
a new project with a new direction.

> https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design#Research.2C_testing_and_validation 
To save
others time... the "testing and validation" part has no
results on the wiki that I can see.
   Mirek

[Miloslav Trmač]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov
<akurtako(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Regarding "Cinnamon as Default Desktop" - how many active
> contributors do really take care of Cinnamon packaging? I don't think that anything
> that has less than 3-4 can even be considered. Last time I checked the only options that
> were satisfying such requirement were KDE and Gnome. I would be happy to be proven wrong
> and we gained 10+ contributors for all the various desktops we ship.
>  Quantity really matters in this case. 
Quantity doesn't tell the whole story.

There are projects that handle every bug report, and publish about
bi-weekly bug fix updates in Fedora. There are also projects in which
some members are quite public about never looking at the Fedora
bugzilla mail.

(From a quick look, and taking into the different number of current
users and existing history, it's unclear whether there is a noticeable
difference between Cinnamon and GNOME 3 with respect to Fedora-focused
maintenance manpower of the relevant packages.)
    Mirek

[Máirín Duffy]

On 01/30/2013 01:05 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> > Actually a lot of research and reason went into GNOME 3's
> development
> > [1],
>  That's about as relevant as "a lot of coding went into $project",
>  which is... not a whole lot when considering which project to make the
>  default. 
But every release is not a decision point, "which desktop will we make
default this time?" Certainly it is *not* a given or granted that any
given software project we have as an upstream has done *any* usability
or user experience research whatsoever, so in that aspect GNOME is
pretty rare.

> > and we picked it up because we are an upstream distro [2].
>  GNOME isn't the only possible upstream.  We picked it up at that time
>  implicitly because it was presented as an upgrade instead of basically
>  a new project with a new direction. 
I meant in the sense, 'do we stick with GNOME 2.x or move to 3.x" FWIW.
>  
> > https://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design#Research.2C_testing_and_validation
>  To save others time... the "testing and validation" part has no
>  results on the wiki that I can see. 
That's a very fair point: I'd very much like to see data there as well.

~m

[TK009]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:

>  But every release is not a decision point, "which desktop will
> we make
>  default this time?" 
I believe it is a point where review where are we are, and where we
would like to be, now and in the future.

>  Certainly it is *not* a given or granted that any
>  given software project we have as an upstream has done *any* usability
>  or user experience research whatsoever, so in that aspect GNOME is
>  pretty rare. 
> From where I sit, I am not convinced the Gnome team did any of that
either beyond lip service. 6 versions to return shutdown speaks for
itself.

[Olav Vitters]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 04:23:43PM -0500, TK009 wrote:
>  From where I sit, I am not convinced the Gnome team did any of that
>  either beyond lip service. 6 versions to return shutdown speaks for
>  itself. 
I saw this negativity was also on Phoronix, where someone else commented
in a similar way:

Are you happy with the shutdown yes or no? If yes, why do you not
applaud it? Seems there is no way of pleasing people. Either we're not
listening, or if we do listen, something else is found which *proves*
we're bad anyway. Note that you've nicely ignored all the other changes
made in those releases. Plus, 6 versions? Your math is off.

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Kevin Kofler]

Eric Smith wrote:

>  On 01/28/2013 08:47 AM, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> > I think switching the desktop that has been our default for over 10
> > years and 18 releases requires just a bit more research and reason
> > than that. ~m
>  
>  I don't disagree with the "more research and reason" part, but the
>  current default desktop has only been "our default" for four releases,
>  F15 through F18.  I don't recall any serious "research and reason"
>  having been involved in the switch that occurred when F15 was being
>  developed.  As far as I can tell, it was just thrust upon us without
>  much consideration as to whether it was good, bad, or indifferent.  My
>  proposal is at least only that, a proposal, and is not being thrust upon
>  anyone without discussion and ultimately a vote. 
+1, what is the default now is a very different (and much less popular) 
beast from what had been the default for "over 10 years".

        Kevin Kofler

[Martin Sourada]

On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 06:36:23 +0100 
Kevin Kofler wrote:

>  Eric Smith wrote:
>  
>  > On 01/28/2013 08:47 AM, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  >> I think switching the desktop that has been our default for over 10
>  >> years and 18 releases requires just a bit more research and reason
>  >> than that. ~m
>  > 
>  > I don't disagree with the "more research and reason" part, but the
>  > current default desktop has only been "our default" for four
>  > releases, F15 through F18.  I don't recall any serious "research
>  > and reason" having been involved in the switch that occurred when
>  > F15 was being developed.  As far as I can tell, it was just thrust
>  > upon us without much consideration as to whether it was good, bad,
>  > or indifferent.  My proposal is at least only that, a proposal, and
>  > is not being thrust upon anyone without discussion and ultimately a
>  > vote.
>  
>  +1, what is the default now is a very different (and much less
>  popular) beast from what had been the default for "over 10 years".
>   
Totally agree, but I have to say -- unless you get rid of *default*
altogether -- that the default has to be supported rather well, and you
cannot force devs to start working on Cinnamon, XFCE, KDE, or whatever
based on a "popularity poll". If we have a default, it should have a
strong developer backing and, as much as I don't like it, for Fedora
that currently (sadly) means Gnome Shell.

Martin

[Kevin Kofler]

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
>  I love GNOME 3 and detest KDE 4. I've tried MATE and Cinnamon on
> both
>  Linux Mint and Fedora and don't really see the point of either of them
>  as long as GNOME 3 offers fallback mode. 
Fallback mode is going away in F19, it's already gone upstream.

>  When you come right down to it, nearly all Linux desktops can be
>  easily customized to provide a Windows-like workflow (menu at lower
>  left, panel at bottom) or a Mac-like workflow (menu at upper left,
>  panel at top). All the major Linux desktops can do this. I've even
>  done this with OpenBox and fbpanel. 
I don't think that'd be suitable for end users at all.

>  You *do* need a good terminal app - I'd pick gnome-terminal over
>  konsole or lxterminal or the XFCE terminal if I had a choice but I
>  could live with any of them. Xterm is even acceptable if you have a
>  3-button mouse. ;-) But other than that, an awful lot of the
>  "innovation" in Linux desktops seems to me to be wasted effort. 
End users are NOT terminal junkies. :-)

        Kevin Kofler

[Stef Walter]

On 02/04/2013 06:28 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> > I love GNOME 3 and detest KDE 4. I've tried MATE and Cinnamon on both
> > Linux Mint and Fedora and don't really see the point of either of them
> > as long as GNOME 3 offers fallback mode.
>  
>  Fallback mode is going away in F19, it's already gone upstream. 
FWIW, see its replacement "Classic Mode" here:

http://blogs.gnome.org/mclasen/2013/01/25/gnome-3-7-at-the-halfway-mark/

Stef

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

Reading the topic about Cinnamon as Default Desktop.
For my view, Cinnamon is nothing more than a heavily tweaked Gnome Shell 
based on reactive feeling. It only duplicated the effort already covered 
by Gnome development.
Issue like nautilus removal of some functionality could be resolved by 
creating the adds like it happened with nautilus-terminal.
I find incredible when it comes to desktop environment like Gnome a 
caging fighting style occur. It tells a lot about which individuals 
really are in order to safely ignore them.

 From my eyes, Cinnamon is nothing special, unworthy as default desktop 
in Fedora.

Luya

[Josh Boyer]

On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>
>  Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
>
>  This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop interface from
>  Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is more
>  familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell interface,
>  while being built from Gnome 3 components. 
We have no focused testing effort on Cinnamon.  I don't think switching
the default after we're already heading towards a 3.8 release of Gnome
is the greatest use of resources.

Please don't construe that as me arguing Gnome 3 is perfect.  It isn't.

>  I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
> Fedora
>  install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome Shell if
>  they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a traditional
>  desktop. 
This is conjecture at best.  There is no data (on either side) to suggest
it is true.

>  The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based
> on the
>  latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate for a
>  default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components. 
I'll agree that Cinnamon would seem to be in a better position going
forward than MATE, but I don't think there's anything to justify it being
the default desktop environment.

josh

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 01/27/2013 02:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop 

We should be moving away from having a default rather then switching it.

JBG

[Aleksandar Kurtakov]

----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 10:04:29 AM
>  Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
>  
>  On 01/27/2013 02:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>  
>  
>  We should be moving away from having a default rather then switching
>  it. 
Yeah, I didn't know that people still feel like there is default - If one goes to
http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora there is "Desktops: KDE, Xfce, GNOME, and
others". Does it mean that KDE is the default as we listed it first :)?
Regarding "Cinnamon as Default Desktop" - how many active contributors do really
take care of Cinnamon packaging? I don't think that anything that has less than 3-4
can even be considered. Last time I checked the only options that were satisfying such
requirement were KDE and Gnome. I would be happy to be proven wrong and we gained 10+
contributors for all the various desktops we ship. 
Quantity really matters in this case.
 Let me give an example from my own Fedora experience as an IDE packager focused on
Eclipse. Netbeans was packaged for Fedora and only 1 guy took care of it and I even helped
for this to happen just for the sake of competition. It was a buzzword for one or two
releases in the relevant groups, people started recommending it and etc. The problems
started when the maintainer was not able to maintain it anymore for his own reasons - not
only Netbeans IDE was orphaned and removed from the distro but various other packages were
left in the wild as they started to use some of the underlying netbeans libraries and no
one stepped in to pick it up and we still have leftovers in Fedora from this times in the
form of people trying to keep what they started to use in a non-coordinated way - everyone
keeps what he needs at the level he/she needs it. Allowing such thing to happen for
something someone would call our "default" (as meaningless it is) desktop would
be a disaster.

P.S. 
I've been KDE user for ~10 years but made the switch to Gnome 3 in Fedora 17 as
it's workflow is clearly allowing me to concentrate easier!


Alexander Kurtakov

>  
>  JBG
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Gerd Hoffmann]

On 01/28/13 10:07, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
>  ----- Original Message -----
> > On 01/27/2013 02:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> >> = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop = 
> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
> >
> > We should be moving away from having a default rather then switching
> > it.
>  
>  Yeah, I didn't know that people still feel like there is default - If
>  one goes to http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora there is "Desktops:
>  KDE, Xfce, GNOME, and others". Does it mean that KDE is the default
>  as we listed it first :)? 
Yes, we have a default desktop.

It is the one you get when you hit the the big "download now" button on
the get-fedora page.

It is the one where the live iso is named "Desktop" instead of
"Gnome".

cheers,
  Gerd

[Nikos Roussos]

On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 14:53 +0000, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
> desktop 
>  interfaces on both Linux and Windows. 
At least for Windows 8, neither Cinnamon is close to its desktop
interface.

>  While it is good that there is research 
>  into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a traditional 
>  interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or 
>  impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome Shell vs. a 
>  more traditional interface. 
Exactly. There is no way to know that. So I see no real reason to change
our default desktop.
Even if we consider Gnome 3 as a "research" (which I don't), Fedora is
known to adopt innovative technologies.


-- 
Nikos Roussos
comzeradd @ freenode.net

[Dan Mashal]

On Monday, January 28, 2013, Nikos Roussos wrote:

>  On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 14:53 +0000, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  > The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
>  desktop
>  > interfaces on both Linux and Windows.
>
>  At least for Windows 8, neither Cinnamon is close to its desktop
>  interface.
>
>  > While it is good that there is research
>  > into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a traditional
>  > interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or
>  > impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome Shell
>  vs. a
>  > more traditional interface.
>
>  Exactly. There is no way to know that. So I see no real reason to change
>  our default desktop.
>  Even if we consider Gnome 3 as a "research" (which I don't), Fedora is
>  known to adopt innovative technologies.
>
>
>  --
>  Nikos Roussos
>  comzeradd @ freenode.net
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org <javascript:;>
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 

Innovative.

"Innovative" or "deevolutionary", "boring", or just plain
"annoying"? They
can all be used in different ways. What you might consider "innovative" a
lot of people consider annoying.

Dan

[Nikos Roussos]

On Mon, 2013-01-28 at 00:10 -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:

>  
>  
>  On Monday, January 28, 2013, Nikos Roussos wrote:
>  
>          On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 14:53 +0000, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>          > The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the
>          traditional desktop
>          > interfaces on both Linux and Windows.
>          
>          At least for Windows 8, neither Cinnamon is close to its
>          desktop
>          interface.
>          
>          > While it is good that there is research
>          > into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have
>          a traditional
>          > interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is
>          difficult or
>          > impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers
>          Gnome Shell vs. a
>          > more traditional interface.
>          
>          Exactly. There is no way to know that. So I see no real reason
>          to change
>          our default desktop.
>          Even if we consider Gnome 3 as a "research" (which I don't),
>          Fedora is
>          known to adopt innovative technologies.
>          
>          
>          --
>          Nikos Roussos
>          comzeradd @ freenode.net
>          
>          --
>          devel mailing list
>          devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>          https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>          
>  
>  
>  Innovative.
>  
>  
>  "Innovative" or "deevolutionary", "boring", or just plain
> "annoying"?
>  They can all be used in different ways. What you might consider
>  "innovative" a lot of people consider annoying. 

True. Or others might consider it productive. Same goes for all Desktop
environments. That's why I said that I see no real argument here for
changing our default desktop.

-- 
Nikos Roussos
comzeradd @ freenode.net

[Michał Piotrowski]

Hi,

2013/1/28 Nikos Roussos <comzeradd(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;

>  **
>  On Mon, 2013-01-28 at 00:10 -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
>
>
>
>  On Monday, January 28, 2013, Nikos Roussos wrote:
>
>  On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 14:53 +0000, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  > The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
>  desktop
>  > interfaces on both Linux and Windows.
>
>  At least for Windows 8, neither Cinnamon is close to its desktop
>  interface.
>
>  > While it is good that there is research
>  > into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a traditional
>  > interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or
>  > impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome Shell
>  vs. a
>  > more traditional interface.
>
>  Exactly. There is no way to know that. So I see no real reason to change
>  our default desktop.
>  Even if we consider Gnome 3 as a "research" (which I don't), Fedora is
>  known to adopt innovative technologies.
>
>
>  --
>  Nikos Roussos
>  comzeradd @ freenode.net
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
>
>   Innovative.
>
>
>
>   "Innovative" or "deevolutionary", "boring", or just plain
> "annoying"?
>  They can all be used in different ways. What you might consider
>  "innovative" a lot of people consider annoying.
>
>
>  True. Or others might consider it productive. Same goes for all Desktop
>  environments. That's why I said that I see no real argument here for
>  changing our default desktop.
>  
Maybe it should be something like "defaultless" desktop. Just install Gnome
and display desktop ballot screen "Yes, we know that Gnome 3 sucks for 85%
of population. Here you got an alternatives."


>    --
>  Nikos Roussos <http://roussos.cc>
>  comzeradd @ freenode.net
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  


-- 
Best regards,
Michal

http://eventhorizon.pl/
https://getactive.pl/

[Sandro Mani]

Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such way that the
download button points to something similar to the current "More options"
page, maybe with a small description for each desktop like "easy to use" /
"feature rich and customizable" / "based on the traditional desktop" /
etc
and possibly sorted by popularity, i.e. number of downloads?


On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote:

>  Hi,
>
>  2013/1/28 Nikos Roussos <comzeradd(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
>
> > **
> > On Mon, 2013-01-28 at 00:10 -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Monday, January 28, 2013, Nikos Roussos wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 14:53 +0000, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > > The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
> > desktop
> > > interfaces on both Linux and Windows.
> >
> > At least for Windows 8, neither Cinnamon is close to its desktop
> > interface.
> >
> > > While it is good that there is research
> > > into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a
> > traditional
> > > interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or
> > > impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome Shell
> > vs. a
> > > more traditional interface.
> >
> > Exactly. There is no way to know that. So I see no real reason to change
> > our default desktop.
> > Even if we consider Gnome 3 as a "research" (which I don't), Fedora is
> > known to adopt innovative technologies.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Nikos Roussos
> > comzeradd @ freenode.net
> >
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
> >
> >
> >  Innovative.
> >
> >
> >
> >  "Innovative" or "deevolutionary", "boring", or just
> plain "annoying"?
> > They can all be used in different ways. What you might consider
> > "innovative" a lot of people consider annoying.
> >
> >
> > True. Or others might consider it productive. Same goes for all Desktop
> > environments. That's why I said that I see no real argument here for
> > changing our default desktop.
> >
>
>  Maybe it should be something like "defaultless" desktop. Just install
>  Gnome and display desktop ballot screen "Yes, we know that Gnome 3 sucks
>  for 85% of population. Here you got an alternatives."
>
>
> >   --
> > Nikos Roussos <http://roussos.cc>
> > comzeradd @ freenode.net
> >
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>
>
>  --
>  Best regards,
>  Michal
>
>  http://eventhorizon.pl/
>  https://getactive.pl/
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>

[Michał Piotrowski]

2013/1/28 Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt;

>  Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such way
> that the
>  download button points to something similar to the current "More options"
>  page, maybe with a small description for each desktop like "easy to use" /
>  "feature rich and customizable" / "based on the traditional desktop"
> / etc
>  and possibly sorted by popularity, i.e. number of downloads?
>  
+1


>  On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > 2013/1/28 Nikos Roussos <comzeradd(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
> >
> >> **
> >> On Mon, 2013-01-28 at 00:10 -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Monday, January 28, 2013, Nikos Roussos wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 14:53 +0000, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> >> > The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
> >> desktop
> >> > interfaces on both Linux and Windows.
> >>
> >> At least for Windows 8, neither Cinnamon is close to its desktop
> >> interface.
> >>
> >> > While it is good that there is research
> >> > into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a
> >> traditional
> >> > interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or
> >> > impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome
> >> Shell vs. a
> >> > more traditional interface.
> >>
> >> Exactly. There is no way to know that. So I see no real reason to change
> >> our default desktop.
> >> Even if we consider Gnome 3 as a "research" (which I don't), Fedora
> is
> >> known to adopt innovative technologies.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Nikos Roussos
> >> comzeradd @ freenode.net
> >>
> >> --
> >> devel mailing list
> >> devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  Innovative.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>  "Innovative" or "deevolutionary", "boring", or
> just plain "annoying"?
> >> They can all be used in different ways. What you might consider
> >> "innovative" a lot of people consider annoying.
> >>
> >>
> >> True. Or others might consider it productive. Same goes for all Desktop
> >> environments. That's why I said that I see no real argument here for
> >> changing our default desktop.
> >>
> >
> > Maybe it should be something like "defaultless" desktop. Just install
> > Gnome and display desktop ballot screen "Yes, we know that Gnome 3 sucks
> > for 85% of population. Here you got an alternatives."
> >
> >
> >>   --
> >> Nikos Roussos <http://roussos.cc>
> >> comzeradd @ freenode.net
> >>
> >> --
> >> devel mailing list
> >> devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Michal
> >
> > http://eventhorizon.pl/
> > https://getactive.pl/
> >
> > --
> > devel mailing list
> > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  


-- 
Best regards,
Michal

http://eventhorizon.pl/
https://getactive.pl/

[Frank Murphy]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 10:14:22 +0100
Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such
> way
>  that the download button points to something similar to the current
>  "More options" page, maybe with a small description for each
>  desktop like "easy to use" / "feature rich and customizable" /
>  "based on the traditional desktop" / etc and possibly sorted by
>  popularity, i.e. number of downloads?
>   
Can people please trim replies.


-- 
Regards,
Frank
http//www.frankly3d.com

[drago01]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Sandro Mani <manisandro(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such way
> that the
>  download button points to something similar to the current "More options"
>  page, maybe with a small description for each desktop like "easy to use" /
>  "feature rich and customizable" / "based on the traditional desktop"
> / etc
>  and possibly sorted by popularity, i.e. number of downloads?
>
>  No. 
People that know about different desktop are able to find them, but showing
a list of spins to new users that cannot make an informed decision would
just confuse them.

Also this is not supportable we only have 2 "release blocking" desktops
(ones that gets tested and are able to cause a slip) + GNOME is the one
where we have the must resources to support (lots of packagers, upstream
developers etc).

[Orcan Ogetbil]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:27 AM, drago01 wrote:
>  On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Sandro Mani wrote:
> >
> > Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such way that the
> > download button points to something similar to the current "More options"
> > page, maybe with a small description for each desktop like "easy to use" /
> > "feature rich and customizable" / "based on the traditional
> desktop" / etc
> > and possibly sorted by popularity, i.e. number of downloads?
> >
>  No.
>
>  People that know about different desktop are able to find them, but showing
>  a list of spins to new users that cannot make an informed decision would
>  just confuse them.
>  
Ah, the standard question and the standard answer in the ever
recurring thread (no offense!). Let me continue with the typical
follow up so we don't break the balance in the galactic symmetry:

The Fedora board clarified the vision statement and the user base back
in 2009 [1]. Accordingly, Fedora targets:
- Voluntary Linux consumer
- Computer-friendly
- Likely collaborator
- General productivity user

Well... Users with such characteristics will likely not get "confused"
by a list of spin choices.

I feel urged to finish with another standard proposal: Why don't we
rotate the default desktop spin on each release between the major DEs?

Best,
Orcan

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base

[drago01]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Orcan Ogetbil <oget.fedora(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:27 AM, drago01 wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Sandro Mani wrote:
> >>
> >> Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such way that the
> >> download button points to something similar to the current "More
> options"
> >> page, maybe with a small description for each desktop like "easy to
> use" /
> >> "feature rich and customizable" / "based on the traditional
> desktop" / etc
> >> and possibly sorted by popularity, i.e. number of downloads?
> >>
> > No.
> >
> > People that know about different desktop are able to find them, but showing
> > a list of spins to new users that cannot make an informed decision would
> > just confuse them.
> >
>
>  Ah, the standard question and the standard answer in the ever
>  recurring thread (no offense!). Let me continue with the typical
>  follow up so we don't break the balance in the galactic symmetry:
>
>  The Fedora board clarified the vision statement and the user base back
>  in 2009 [1]. Accordingly, Fedora targets:
>  - Voluntary Linux consumer
>  - Computer-friendly
>  - Likely collaborator
>  - General productivity user
>
>  Well... Users with such characteristics will likely not get "confused"
>  by a list of spin choices. 
User that don't get confused can and will find the list anyway (or
probably will use the DVD and select the desktop of their choice).
So why make it harder for one type of users to save the other type one click?
Does not sound like a worthy trade off to me.

>  I feel urged to finish with another standard proposal: Why don't
> we
>  rotate the default desktop spin on each release between the major DEs? 
Because that's nonsense. Changing the default every release makes us
look incompetent. Also I don't see what kind of problem such a
rotation is going to solve.

[Kevin Kofler]

Sandro Mani wrote:
>  Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such way
> that the
>  download button points to something similar to the current "More options"
>  page, maybe with a small description for each desktop like "easy to use" /
>  "feature rich and customizable" / "based on the traditional desktop"
> / etc
>  and possibly sorted by popularity, i.e. number of downloads? 
+1, I've been asking for that ever since the get-fedora redesign and the 
introduction of that misguided direct link to the wrong ISO (GNOME-only and 
32-bit-only).

        Kevin Kofler

[Kevin Kofler]

I wrote:

>  Sandro Mani wrote:
> > Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such way that
> > the download button points to something similar to the current "More
> > options" page, maybe with a small description for each desktop like "easy
> > to use" / "feature rich and customizable" / "based on the
> traditional
> > desktop" / etc and possibly sorted by popularity, i.e. number of
> > downloads?
>  
>  +1, I've been asking for that ever since the get-fedora redesign and the
>  introduction of that misguided direct link to the wrong ISO (GNOME-only
>  and 32-bit-only). 
PS: It's actually 64-bit-only now, but that doesn't solve the issue, it'll 
just be wrong for a different category of users. Whatever you pick, it's 
always wrong for somebody, which is why bypassing the choice of ISO doesn't 
make any sense whatsoever.

        Kevin Kofler

[Martin Sourada]

On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 08:34:03 +0100 
Kevin Kofler wrote:

>  I wrote:
>  
>  > Sandro Mani wrote:
>  >> Can't we simply re-organize the fedoraproject website in such way
>  >> that the download button points to something similar to the
>  >> current "More options" page, maybe with a small description for
>  >> each desktop like "easy to use" / "feature rich and
>  >> customizable" / "based on the traditional desktop" / etc and
>  >> possibly sorted by popularity, i.e. number of downloads?
>  > 
>  > +1, I've been asking for that ever since the get-fedora redesign
>  > and the introduction of that misguided direct link to the wrong ISO
>  > (GNOME-only and 32-bit-only).
>  
>  PS: It's actually 64-bit-only now, but that doesn't solve the issue,
>  it'll just be wrong for a different category of users. Whatever you
>  pick, it's always wrong for somebody, which is why bypassing the
>  choice of ISO doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
>   
Big +1. What will an unsuspecting user think when he downloads, burns
and tries Fedora on 32bit machine? That it's broken, because the
download link actually links to the 64bit iso (and yes, I just tried it
on a 32bit machine and it still links to the 64bit image) :-/ The best
thing to drive potential users away is to give them one-click download
that is broken...

Martin

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 14:16:58 +0100, Martin Sourada wrote:
>  Big +1. What will an unsuspecting user think when he downloads,
> burns
>  and tries Fedora on 32bit machine? That it's broken, 
> From what I have reports even Fedora 32-bit does not boot on such
> machines 
because nobody tests the bleeding edge Fedora kernels on such obsolete
hardware.


Jan

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/04/2013 02:42 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>  On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 14:16:58 +0100, Martin Sourada wrote:
> > Big +1. What will an unsuspecting user think when he downloads, burns
> > and tries Fedora on 32bit machine? That it's broken,
>
>   From what I have reports even Fedora 32-bit does not boot on such machines
>  because nobody tests the bleeding edge Fedora kernels on such obsolete
>  hardware. 
Could you provide more details? I have Fedora 18 running on several 
32bit machines and am wondering what you are referring to.

Ralf

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 15:23:45 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  On 02/04/2013 02:42 PM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>  > From what I have reports even Fedora 32-bit does not boot on such machines
>  >because nobody tests the bleeding edge Fedora kernels on such obsolete
>  >hardware.
>  
>  Could you provide more details? 
Unfortunately I cannot, I said "reports". A friend of mine has various old
machines and this is what he reported.  (I have one 32-bit machine and Fedoras
work there.)

Still I believe it is probably true as I doubt Fedora QA tests compatibility
with old hosts.


Regards,
Jan

[Martin Sourada]

On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 16:34:18 +0100 
Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>  Still I believe it is probably true as I doubt Fedora QA tests
>  compatibility with old hosts.
>   
Fedora QA AFAIK tests on their own hardware only + virtual machines. I
don't know about kernel upstream QA/devs though.

I'm running F18 on a 32bit machine as well.

Martin

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 23:27 +0100, Martin Sourada wrote:
>  On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 16:34:18 +0100 
>  Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>  > Still I believe it is probably true as I doubt Fedora QA tests
>  > compatibility with old hosts.
>  > 
>  Fedora QA AFAIK tests on their own hardware only + virtual machines. I
>  don't know about kernel upstream QA/devs though.
>  
>  I'm running F18 on a 32bit machine as well. 
The RH staff on the QA team have access to RH's test farm if we need it,
though we generally use it only for testing specific hardware we don't
happen to have ourselves (mainly enterprise storage/networking stuff).
Mostly we test on 'whatever we have lying around the office', which I
think does include a few 32-bit only hosts.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Justin Forbes]

On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 11:27:10PM +0100, Martin Sourada wrote:
>  On Mon, 4 Feb 2013 16:34:18 +0100 
>  Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>  > Still I believe it is probably true as I doubt Fedora QA tests
>  > compatibility with old hosts.
>  > 
>  Fedora QA AFAIK tests on their own hardware only + virtual machines. I
>  don't know about kernel upstream QA/devs though.
>  
>  I'm running F18 on a 32bit machine as well.
>   
Actually, I am installing a 32bit F18 on my laptop today. Though to be
honest, I haven't run 32bit outsideo of a guest since before FC1 GA. I have
noticed a large number of kernel bugs that seem to trigger on 32bit only. I
am guessing this is partly due to PAE being used much more than it used to
be, combined with the fact that very few kernel developers actually run
32bit hardware.  That said, I plan to investigate kernel issues with it,
and will not be doing full QA checks accross software I do not use in day
to day desktop use.

Justin

[Kévin Raymond]

>  > From what I have reports even Fedora 32-bit does not boot on
> such machines
>  >because nobody tests the bleeding edge Fedora kernels on such obsolete
>  >hardware.
>  
>  Could you provide more details? I have Fedora 18 running on several
>  32bit machines and am wondering what you are referring to. 
From releng, I got the confirmation that some new computers does boot only UEFI
OS by default. And we don't provide UEFI on the 32bit ISO. Therefor, it is not
compatible.

Comes from the following report:
https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-websites/ticket/176


-- 
Kévin Raymond
(Shaiton)

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/04/2013 05:47 PM, Kévin Raymond wrote:
> >>  From what I have reports even Fedora 32-bit does not boot on
> such machines
> >> because nobody tests the bleeding edge Fedora kernels on such obsolete
> >> hardware.
> >
> > Could you provide more details? I have Fedora 18 running on several
> > 32bit machines and am wondering what you are referring to.
>
>   From releng, I got the confirmation that some new computers does boot only UEFI
>  OS by default. And we don't provide UEFI on the 32bit ISO. Therefor, it is not
>  compatible. 
Ah, OK - My 32bit machines all predate UEFI ;)

[2 ca. 4 year old, still-inuse Atom-N270 netbooks and a 10years+ old 
PIII, which serves as testing machine ;)]

Ralf

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 18:19 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  On 02/04/2013 05:47 PM, Kévin Raymond wrote:
>  >>>  From what I have reports even Fedora 32-bit does not boot on such machines
>  >>> because nobody tests the bleeding edge Fedora kernels on such obsolete
>  >>> hardware.
>  >>
>  >> Could you provide more details? I have Fedora 18 running on several
>  >> 32bit machines and am wondering what you are referring to.
>  >
>  >  From releng, I got the confirmation that some new computers does boot only UEFI
>  > OS by default. And we don't provide UEFI on the 32bit ISO. Therefor, it is not
>  > compatible.
>  Ah, OK - My 32bit machines all predate UEFI ;)
>  
>  [2 ca. 4 year old, still-inuse Atom-N270 netbooks and a 10years+ old 
>  PIII, which serves as testing machine ;)] 
I doubt that's what the OP was talking about, as he mentioned "obsolete
hardware". There was exactly one set of systems, ever, that used EFI-ish
firmware but were 32-bit not 64-bit: the very early Intel Macs. We do
not support those by policy. There's no practical reason to want to boot
a 32-bit Fedora image as UEFI native - if you're doing it, it means you
got something wrong. But people do get things wrong, and it was
reasonable to stop labelling the 32-bit image as 'most compatible' to
try and stop people getting this thing wrong.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Kévin Raymond]

Le lundi 04 févr. 2013 à 14:42:35 (+0100), Jan Kratochvil a écrit : 
>  On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 14:16:58 +0100, Martin Sourada wrote:
>  > Big +1. What will an unsuspecting user think when he downloads, burns
>  > and tries Fedora on 32bit machine? That it's broken,
>  
>  From what I have reports even Fedora 32-bit does not boot on such machines
>  because nobody tests the bleeding edge Fedora kernels on such obsolete
>  hardware. 
Hi guys,
I think you are completely off-topic here. You are discussing about the
fedoraproject.org website design, with devels about the Cinnamon Feature
proposal...

This is a decent discussion that should appear on the websites mailing list. But
I agree, we won't ask everyone to register on every mailing list... Hyperkitty,
where are you? :)

So let's try to resolve that here. (moreover we want to refresh the websites).
First of all, we updated a lot the get-fedora-options[1] page, which is clearer
and includes more choices now. It's not perfect. Nothing is perfect. But
improving is the way to go.

The get-fedora default download page[2] is linked from the main page, on the
first slide when you ask to "learn more". The download button there gives you
directly the iso.

From the main page, on the righ side, you have the "full set of downdoal
options" who direct users to [1], the page that you guys prefer I think.
Yes, the Fedora banner on the right side (and from every websites including the
banner) link to the get-fedora[2] page. This was done that way to help people
getting Fedora right now, without having to choose between so many options.
People knowing options will look for them and find the right page. Which is
linked 6 times from there.

The page that I don't really find usefull is get-fedora-all[3]. It could be
included on the other ones. But guys like it. We already spoke about this with
Sijis.
But new input is welcome.

If you guys can come up with a clear and brillant proposal, we would be happy to
read it and apply it if better.

The idea is to only propose ISO that has QA, which are defined as possible
blockers from the main websites. spins.fpo of course show links to all available
spins.
That is not perfect. But we don't want to give too many choices to the users, we
want to be consistent between releases, and the new websites design was clearly
defined for the end user, and not for deep programmers. (That look for the alt
nightly ISOs).

For the 32Vs64 bits ISOs, we moved by default to 64 bits for F17 (as approved by
FESCo) because Fedora is a leading edge GNU/Linux distribution, we don't have
LTS and don't want to mainain software for the whole informatic history.
Mostly all Intel CPUs now are 64 bits. If the ISO does not boot, guys will have
to ask or read for help, and we provid(ed?) docs about how to check the CPU
arch. Regarding the doc, the were updating it with regards to UEFI. Not sure if
it is in prod, I have to check.

As requested, we removed the "most compatible" label for the 32bits, is this
ISO
was not booting under UEFI.

What we should really add, is a nice page helping people to install (change) a
new DE after the default Fedora install. They should not really care about which
iso to download. If they have a good internet connexion, they should be able to
easily change their DE. Or install yum groups. In an other way, we should
provide a nice page to "get the spin" once they have installed Fedora. Or write
a simple app for that..?
Oh also, we try to feature a new spin everytime on the main slideshow. But we
can't print them all..

Any help appreciated of course.

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-options
[2] http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora
[3] http://fedoraproject.org/en/get-fedora-all

-- 
Kévin Raymond
(Shaiton)

[Kevin Kofler]

Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>  From what I have reports even Fedora 32-bit does not boot on such
> machines
>  because nobody tests the bleeding edge Fedora kernels on such obsolete
>  hardware. 
FYI, kernel-3.7.3-101.fc17.i686 runs fine on a Pentium 4 Northwood (which 
predates EM64T, i.e. what's now known as Intel 64). It's what I'm sending 
this message from.

        Kevin Kofler

[Michael Scherer]

Le lundi 28 janvier 2013 à 09:56 +0100, Michał Piotrowski a écrit :
>  
>  Maybe it should be something like "defaultless" desktop. Just install
>  Gnome and display desktop ballot screen "Yes, we know that Gnome 3
>  sucks for 85% of population. Here you got an alternatives." 
For one, if there is 85% of a group that do not use a software, that
doesn't mean it sucks for them. I do not use KDE, I do not consider it
to sucks. You cannot use 2 DE at the same time, so obviously, you have
to chose at a moment.

Personally, I do not think that's a great idea from a UI point of view
to ask to new users ( cause the non new users are aware they can install
something else, so the ballot would be useless for them, and maybe even
annoying in the long run ) with choice they may not care about at all.
Non technical users I see at work have already enough trouble to choose
between zimbra and thunderbird, I can only imagine the result on asking
them to choose a whole DE, a concept that will be alien to most of them.


But let's set aside the objections for a while and imagine that this is
the way to go. Unless we want offer a reduced quality, all desktop must
have the same level of polish and focus.

- this has some implication on the QA point of view, because you have to
do the same level of QA on all projects presented ( and given the fact
that some old gnome-shell bugs are still present on cinnamon, I am
pretty sure that cinnamon didn't get the same level of QA and testing by
the community ). So the first step would be to make sure there is enough
people doing the QA, for enough time. 

- This also have a impact on the documentation, unless people volunteer
to write X docs for the X DE. So for the same reason as QA, any desktop
that want to be part of the ballot screen should have a sustained
community documentation team.

- last but not least, having enough coders and developers upstream, and
packagers in Fedora. I was less than impressed by Cinnamon code and
design, and afaik, there is only 2 packagers to take care of, and one of
them is already doing lots of work on another DE. So for the same reason
and to offer a good quality, I think any desktop part of the ballot
screen should have a track of sustainability regarding packaging.

And of course, if people want that, someone need to volunteer to
coordinate that, and make the work on the website.

So even before deciding if this is a good idea or not, people should
work to raise the quality. And even without the ballot screen, having
enough QA and documentation, coders and packagers will be a good idea
( aka, no excuse "but if there is no ballot, I will not do any work" )

-- 
Michael Scherer

[Michał Piotrowski]

2013/1/28 Michael Scherer <misc(a)zarb.org&gt;:
>  Le lundi 28 janvier 2013 à 09:56 +0100, Michał Piotrowski a écrit :
> >
> > Maybe it should be something like "defaultless" desktop. Just install
> > Gnome and display desktop ballot screen "Yes, we know that Gnome 3
> > sucks for 85% of population. Here you got an alternatives."
>
>  For one, if there is 85% of a group that do not use a software, that
>  doesn't mean it sucks for them. I do not use KDE, I do not consider it
>  to sucks. You cannot use 2 DE at the same time, so obviously, you have
>  to chose at a moment.
>
>  Personally, I do not think that's a great idea from a UI point of view
>  to ask to new users ( cause the non new users are aware they can install
>  something else, so the ballot would be useless for them, and maybe even
>  annoying in the long run ) 
Personally, I have never, ever used ballot screen on Windows. But I'm
always glad when I see it - because of this peoples know that there
are alternatives :)

-- 
Best regards,
Michal

http://eventhorizon.pl/
https://getactive.pl/

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:22:16 +0100, Nikos Roussos wrote:
>  True. Or others might consider it productive. Same goes for all
> Desktop
>  environments. That's why I said that I see no real argument here for
>  changing our default desktop. 
Could we make a web poll for preferred desktop and make the top one the Fedora
default?  (default = link "Download now!" on http://fedoraproject.org )

If it is Gnome 3 Shell then fine but AFAIK it won't be Gnome 3 Shell.


Jan

[Florian Weimer]

On 01/28/2013 11:01 AM, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>  On Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:22:16 +0100, Nikos Roussos wrote:
> > True. Or others might consider it productive. Same goes for all Desktop
> > environments. That's why I said that I see no real argument here for
> > changing our default desktop.
>
>  Could we make a web poll for preferred desktop and make the top one the Fedora
>  default?  (default = link "Download now!" on http://fedoraproject.org ) 
Better yet, use analytics to predict the preferred desktop and adjust 
the download link accordingly.  Not sure if you'd need a poll for that, 
but it probably wouldn't hurt.

The poll or the downloads themselves could set a cookie to override the 
predicted preferences.

-- 
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security Team

[Sandro Mani]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Jan Kratochvil
<jan.kratochvil(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote:

>  Could we make a web poll for preferred desktop and make the top one the
>  Fedora
>  default?  (default = link "Download now!" on http://fedoraproject.org )
>
>  If it is Gnome 3 Shell then fine but AFAIK it won't be Gnome 3 Shell.
>  
IMO such polls will always be a source of controversy and bad feelings.
Let's just present the users all the options in a nice overview and let
them decide.

[Matthias Clasen]

----- Original Message -----
>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop = 

>  I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
>  Fedora
>  install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome
>  Shell if
>  they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>  traditional
>  desktop.
>  
>  The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based
>  on the
>  latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate
>  for a
>  default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components. 
Some facts:

- Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is not a full fork of
mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and bug-fixes are not going either way...

- GNOME 3.8 will replace the dismal fallback mode with a new 'classic' mode that
is actually based on the latest GNOME components, and will be a more 'traditional
desktop', whatever that means.

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Matthias Clasen <mclasen(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  ----- Original Message -----
> > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>
>
> > I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
> > Fedora
> > install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome
> > Shell if
> > they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
> > traditional
> > desktop.
> >
> > The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based
> > on the
> > latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate
> > for a
> > default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>
>  Some facts:
>
>  - Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is not a full fork of
> mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and bug-fixes are not going either way...
Did you mean "... but it is now a full fork..." ?

josh

[Matthias Clasen]

----- Original Message -----


>  > Some facts:
>  >
>  > - Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is not a
>  > full fork of mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and
>  > bug-fixes are not going either way...
>  
>  Did you mean "... but it is now a full fork..." ?
>   
Yes, thats what I meant. Thanks for catching that.

[Dan Mashal]

On Monday, January 28, 2013, Matthias Clasen wrote:

>  ----- Original Message -----
>  > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>
>
>  > I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
>  > Fedora
>  > install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome
>  > Shell if
>  > they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>  > traditional
>  > desktop.
>  >
>  > The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based
>  > on the
>  > latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate
>  > for a
>  > default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>
>  Some facts:
>
>  - Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is not a full
>  fork of mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and bug-fixes are not
>  going either way...
>
>  - GNOME 3.8 will replace the dismal fallback mode with a new 'classic'
>  mode that is actually based on the latest GNOME components, and will be a
>  more 'traditional desktop', whatever that means.
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org <javascript:;>
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 

Let's see how lightweight, bug free and usable it is. Why don't you just
merge the 3 projects instead of wasting your time? We could all work
together.

There could be different "flavors" of Gnome. Now I know that we are both
biased here, however what it really feels like here is REDHAT
employees want Gnome 3 and they are giving a bunch of bullshit excuses on
why it should be, referencing various stupid apple to orange comparisons
from 10 years ago. Why don't we take a poll where no Red Hat employees can
vote. Only non Red Hat Fedora employees and the board itself can make a
final decision after considering what FESCO has to say about it. Face it.
Fedora 15 Gnome 3 cause a major uproar. Anaconda on RHEL6 is easier to use
than Anaconda 18. Almost 3 years later and "oh yeah we realized we should
probably add a real "fallback" mode to Gnome 3. Meanwhile the main people
writing code are not the community.  Meanwhile MATE is lighter weight than
Gnome 2.3, has numerous bug fixes, will have full support for
systems/logind.. Something even Gnome 3 still has trouble with.

Is it really that scary for you guys to think about something else besides
Gnome 3 and KDE?

Not enough support? Then step up and quit whining. You know how to help,
Red Hat employees. Don't be selfish. This is Fedora not RHEL. This is a
community based distribution not Red Hats playground. Please feel free to
correct me if I'm wrong.

Everyone loves to dance around the fact about what Fedora is or isn't.

This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003.

Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like it.
Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are less people
using Fedora.

And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press coverage in
Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last 30 days. It
hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda 18. You are on
serious drugs if you believe that.

Dan

[Olav Vitters]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:13:34AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  Let's see how lightweight, bug free and usable it is. Why
> don't you just
>  merge the 3 projects instead of wasting your time? We could all work
>  together. 
MATE developers actually have GNOME git accounts now.

>  There could be different "flavors" of Gnome. Now I know
> that we are both
>  biased here, however what it really feels like here is REDHAT
>  employees want Gnome 3 and they are giving a bunch of bullshit excuses on
>  why it should be, referencing various stupid apple to orange comparisons
>  from 10 years ago. Why don't we take a poll where no Red Hat employees can 
"bullshit", "stupid"

>  vote. Only non Red Hat Fedora employees and the board itself can make
> a
>  final decision after considering what FESCO has to say about it. Face it.
>  Fedora 15 Gnome 3 cause a major uproar. Anaconda on RHEL6 is easier to use
>  than Anaconda 18. Almost 3 years later and "oh yeah we realized we should
>  probably add a real "fallback" mode to Gnome 3. Meanwhile the main people
GNOME classic is not the same as a fallback mode.

>  writing code are not the community.  Meanwhile MATE is lighter weight
> than
>  Gnome 2.3, has numerous bug fixes, will have full support for
>  systems/logind.. Something even Gnome 3 still has trouble with. 
MATE did not have that much development, nor that many developers if you
compare it to the amount of work done between a GNOME 2.x release.

Could you reference the bugs that GNOME 3 has problems with systemd?
Because it works fine for me.

>  Is it really that scary for you guys to think about something else
> besides
>  Gnome 3 and KDE?
>  
>  Not enough support? Then step up and quit whining. You know how to help,
>  Red Hat employees. Don't be selfish. This is Fedora not RHEL. This is a
>  community based distribution not Red Hats playground. Please feel free to
>  correct me if I'm wrong. 
I suggest you actually do some work instead of showing that you dislike
Red Hat employees.

>  Everyone loves to dance around the fact about what Fedora is or
> isn't.
>  
>  This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003.
>  
>  Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like it.
>  Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are less people
>  using Fedora. 
You say "projects": which projects exactly?

>  And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press coverage
> in
>  Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last 30 days. It
>  hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda 18. You are on
>  serious drugs if you believe that. 
"serious drugs"

Quit with attacking people, then maybe people will actually listen. At
the moment you are very vague and unspecific (e.g. bug references, not
vague claims). The only think you make clear is that you're angry.

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Dan Mashal]

On Tuesday, January 29, 2013, Olav Vitters wrote:
>  >MATE developers actually have GNOME git accounts now. 

I know that.

> GNOME classic is not the same as a fallback mode. 

I am skeptical.

>  MATE did not have that much development, nor that many developers if you
>  compare it to the amount of work done between a GNOME 2.x release. 

     Paid full time employees vs non paid hobbyists.

> Could you reference the bugs that GNOME 3 has problems with systemd?
> Because it works fine for me. 
You know how search RHBZ?

>  > Is it really that scary for you guys to think about something else
>  besides
>  > Gnome 3 and KDE?
>  >
>  > Not enough support? Then step up and quit whining. You know how to help,
>  > Red Hat employees. Don't be selfish. This is Fedora not RHEL. This is a
>  > community based distribution not Red Hats playground. Please feel free to
>  > correct me if I'm wrong.
>
>  I suggest you actually do some work instead of showing that you dislike
>  Red Hat employees. 

>  Done. 
>  Everyone loves to dance around the fact about what Fedora is or
> isn't.
>  >
>  > This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003.
>  >
>  > Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like it.
>  > Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are less people
>  > using Fedora.
>
>  You say "projects": which projects exactly?
>
>  > And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press coverage in
>  > Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last 30 days.
>  It
>  > hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda 18. You are on
>  > serious drugs if you believe that.
>
>  >"serious drugs"
>
>  >Quit with attacking people, then maybe people will actually listen. At
>  >the moment you are very vague and unspecific (e.g. bug references, not
>  >vague claims). The only think you make clear is that you're angry. 

Nobody has been listening for the last 3 years.

Dan

[Olav Vitters]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:36:22AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  On Tuesday, January 29, 2013, Olav Vitters wrote:
>  >
>  > >MATE developers actually have GNOME git accounts now.
>  
>  I know that.
>  
>  >GNOME classic is not the same as a fallback mode.
>  
>  
>  I am skeptical. 
That is not what I meant. Fallback was due to the lack of hardware
accelleration. It could be changed into something with a panel. Classic
provides a few small changes to change the workflow to more match what
GNOME 2 did.

>  > MATE did not have that much development, nor that many
> developers if you
>  > compare it to the amount of work done between a GNOME 2.x release.
>  
>       Paid full time employees vs non paid hobbyists. 
For one: I'd like to see your comparison. There are loads of people
contributing to GNOME. It is translated to 40-50 languages, almost all
of that work is done by volunteers.

Secondly: You suggested that MATE received a lot of work. Now it seems
you agree with my assertion that GNOME did way more work.

>   >Could you reference the bugs that GNOME 3 has problems with
> systemd?
>   >Because it works fine for me.
>  
>  You know how search RHBZ? 
You're being vague.

You said that MATE has better support than GNOME 3. Please stay on topic
and provide references. Note that my intention is to get such issues
fixed upstream. You said you don't feel heard by GNOME, but I am
specifically asking what troubles you see with GNOME 3 and systemd.

>  > > This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003.
>  > >
>  > > Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like it.
>  > > Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are less people
>  > > using Fedora.
>  >
>  > You say "projects": which projects exactly? 
I noticed you did not respond to this.

>  > >"serious drugs"
>  >
>  > >Quit with attacking people, then maybe people will actually listen. At
>  > >the moment you are very vague and unspecific (e.g. bug references, not
>  > >vague claims). The only think you make clear is that you're angry.
>  
>  
>  Nobody has been listening for the last 3 years. 
I've seen the changes that various GNOME developers as well as Red Hat
employees have made. I've seen GNOME developers trying to understand
issues and make changes. I've even tried to summarize this in various
release notes.

Now I'm not sure who you mean with "nobody". I assume Red Hat employees
working on GNOME. In which case that's factually wrong.

More importantly: Not feeling heard is no excuse for attacking people.

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Thomas Bendler]

2013/1/29 Olav Vitters <olav(a)vitters.nl&gt;

>  [...]
>  I've seen the changes that various GNOME developers as well as Red Hat
>  employees have made. I've seen GNOME developers trying to understand
>  issues and make changes. I've even tried to summarize this in various
>  release notes.
>  Now I'm not sure who you mean with "nobody". I assume Red Hat employees
>  working on GNOME. In which case that's factually wrong.
>  [...]
>  
The UI will always be an emotional and subjective "thing". Personally I
think that Gnome 3 is a good development but could still do things better
(i.e. take a look at  Unity and think about there ideas to save space on
the desktop like global menu and stuff like this which would be helpfull
for guys like me using 14" laptop displays). But I don't think you can do
much against posts like I would like to have my old Gnome 2 desktop back.
They will always have the impression not to be heard anymore, that's the
nature of radically change the UI design.

Regards, Thomas
-- 
Linux ... enjoy the ride!

[Aleksandar Kurtakov]

----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Dan Mashal" <dan.mashal(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:13:34 PM
>  Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  On Monday, January 28, 2013, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>  
>  
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  
>  
>  > I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
>  > Fedora
>  > install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the
>  > Gnome
>  > Shell if
>  > they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>  > traditional
>  > desktop.
>  > 
>  > The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being
>  > based
>  > on the
>  > latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better
>  > candidate
>  > for a
>  > default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>  
>  Some facts:
>  
>  - Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is not a
>  full fork of mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and
>  bug-fixes are not going either way...
>  
>  - GNOME 3.8 will replace the dismal fallback mode with a new
>  'classic' mode that is actually based on the latest GNOME
>  components, and will be a more 'traditional desktop', whatever that
>  means.
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  
>  
>  Let's see how lightweight, bug free and usable it is. Why don't you
>  just merge the 3 projects instead of wasting your time? We could all
>  work together.
>  
>  
>  There could be different "flavors" of Gnome. Now I know that we are
>  both biased here, however what it really feels like here is REDHAT
>  employees want Gnome 3 and they are giving a bunch of bullshit
>  excuses on why it should be, referencing various stupid apple to
>  orange comparisons from 10 years ago. Why don't we take a poll where
>  no Red Hat employees can vote.  
Since when my work(hence vote) in Fedora is unwanted because I'm Red Hat employee?
I don't give a sh*t about what the default is but one should tell you - SHUT UP!!! And
yes this is exactly what you were trying to tell me.
So please send your next message once you learned to deal with technical questions in a
technical way or if you can't never would be better!!!

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team


>  Only non Red Hat Fedora employees and
>  the board itself can make a final decision after considering what
>  FESCO has to say about it. Face it. Fedora 15 Gnome 3 cause a major
>  uproar. Anaconda on RHEL6 is easier to use than Anaconda 18. Almost
>  3 years later and "oh yeah we realized we should probably add a real
>  "fallback" mode to Gnome 3. Meanwhile the main people writing code
>  are not the community. Meanwhile MATE is lighter weight than Gnome
>  2.3, has numerous bug fixes, will have full support for
>  systems/logind.. Something even Gnome 3 still has trouble with.
>  
>  
>  Is it really that scary for you guys to think about something else
>  besides Gnome 3 and KDE?
>  
>  
>  Not enough support? Then step up and quit whining. You know how to
>  help, Red Hat employees. Don't be selfish. This is Fedora not RHEL.
>  This is a community based distribution not Red Hats playground.
>  Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
>  
>  
>  Everyone loves to dance around the fact about what Fedora is or
>  isn't.
>  
>  
>  This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003.
>  
>  
>  Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like
>  it. Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are
>  less people using Fedora.
>  
>  
>  And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press coverage
>  in Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last 30
>  days. It hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda 18.
>  You are on serious drugs if you believe that.
>  
>  
>  Dan
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Jon Ciesla]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com&gt;wrote:

>  ----- Original Message -----
>  > From: "Dan Mashal" <dan.mashal(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:13:34 PM
>  > Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > On Monday, January 28, 2013, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > ----- Original Message -----
>  > > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  >
>  >
>  > > I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
>  > > Fedora
>  > > install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the
>  > > Gnome
>  > > Shell if
>  > > they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>  > > traditional
>  > > desktop.
>  > >
>  > > The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being
>  > > based
>  > > on the
>  > > latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better
>  > > candidate
>  > > for a
>  > > default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>  >
>  > Some facts:
>  >
>  > - Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is not a
>  > full fork of mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and
>  > bug-fixes are not going either way...
>  >
>  > - GNOME 3.8 will replace the dismal fallback mode with a new
>  > 'classic' mode that is actually based on the latest GNOME
>  > components, and will be a more 'traditional desktop', whatever that
>  > means.
>  > --
>  > devel mailing list
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  >
>  >
>  > Let's see how lightweight, bug free and usable it is. Why don't you
>  > just merge the 3 projects instead of wasting your time? We could all
>  > work together.
>  >
>  >
>  > There could be different "flavors" of Gnome. Now I know that we are
>  > both biased here, however what it really feels like here is REDHAT
>  > employees want Gnome 3 and they are giving a bunch of bullshit
>  > excuses on why it should be, referencing various stupid apple to
>  > orange comparisons from 10 years ago. Why don't we take a poll where
>  > no Red Hat employees can vote.
>
>  Since when my work(hence vote) in Fedora is unwanted because I'm Red Hat
>  employee?
>  I don't give a sh*t about what the default is but one should tell you -
>  SHUT UP!!! And yes this is exactly what you were trying to tell me.
>  So please send your next message once you learned to deal with technical
>  questions in a technical way or if you can't never would be better!!!
>
>  
That's not helpful.

-J


>  Alexander Kurtakov
>  Red Hat Eclipse team
>
>
>  > Only non Red Hat Fedora employees and
>  > the board itself can make a final decision after considering what
>  > FESCO has to say about it. Face it. Fedora 15 Gnome 3 cause a major
>  > uproar. Anaconda on RHEL6 is easier to use than Anaconda 18. Almost
>  > 3 years later and "oh yeah we realized we should probably add a real
>  > "fallback" mode to Gnome 3. Meanwhile the main people writing code
>  > are not the community. Meanwhile MATE is lighter weight than Gnome
>  > 2.3, has numerous bug fixes, will have full support for
>  > systems/logind.. Something even Gnome 3 still has trouble with.
>  >
>  >
>  > Is it really that scary for you guys to think about something else
>  > besides Gnome 3 and KDE?
>  >
>  >
>  > Not enough support? Then step up and quit whining. You know how to
>  > help, Red Hat employees. Don't be selfish. This is Fedora not RHEL.
>  > This is a community based distribution not Red Hats playground.
>  > Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
>  >
>  >
>  > Everyone loves to dance around the fact about what Fedora is or
>  > isn't.
>  >
>  >
>  > This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003.
>  >
>  >
>  > Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like
>  > it. Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are
>  > less people using Fedora.
>  >
>  >
>  > And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press coverage
>  > in Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last 30
>  > days. It hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda 18.
>  > You are on serious drugs if you believe that.
>  >
>  >
>  > Dan
>  > --
>  > devel mailing list
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 



-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/
------------------------------------------------
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

[Aleksandar Kurtakov]

----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Jon Ciesla" <limburgher(a)gmail.com&gt;
>  To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 4:58:11 PM
>  Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Aleksandar Kurtakov <
>  akurtako(a)redhat.com > wrote:
>  
>  
>  ----- Original Message -----
>  > From: "Dan Mashal" < dan.mashal(a)gmail.com >
>  > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org >
>  > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:13:34 PM
>  > Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
>  > 
>  > 
>  > 
>  > 
>  > On Monday, January 28, 2013, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>  > 
>  > 
>  > ----- Original Message -----
>  > > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  > 
>  > 
>  > > I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new
>  > > Fedora
>  > > install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the
>  > > Gnome
>  > > Shell if
>  > > they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>  > > traditional
>  > > desktop.
>  > > 
>  > > The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being
>  > > based
>  > > on the
>  > > latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better
>  > > candidate
>  > > for a
>  > > default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>  > 
>  > Some facts:
>  > 
>  > - Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is not a
>  > full fork of mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and
>  > bug-fixes are not going either way...
>  > 
>  > - GNOME 3.8 will replace the dismal fallback mode with a new
>  > 'classic' mode that is actually based on the latest GNOME
>  > components, and will be a more 'traditional desktop', whatever that
>  > means.
>  > --
>  > devel mailing list
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  > 
>  > 
>  > Let's see how lightweight, bug free and usable it is. Why don't you
>  > just merge the 3 projects instead of wasting your time? We could
>  > all
>  > work together.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > There could be different "flavors" of Gnome. Now I know that we are
>  > both biased here, however what it really feels like here is REDHAT
>  > employees want Gnome 3 and they are giving a bunch of bullshit
>  > excuses on why it should be, referencing various stupid apple to
>  > orange comparisons from 10 years ago. Why don't we take a poll
>  > where
>  > no Red Hat employees can vote.
>  
>  Since when my work(hence vote) in Fedora is unwanted because I'm Red
>  Hat employee?
>  I don't give a sh*t about what the default is but one should tell you
>  - SHUT UP!!! And yes this is exactly what you were trying to tell
>  me.
>  So please send your next message once you learned to deal with
>  technical questions in a technical way or if you can't never would
>  be better!!!
>  
>  
>  
>  That's not helpful. 
Nor I wanted it to be - Fight fire with fire! People that start personal attacks on
fedora-devel list should be BANNED.

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team

>  
>  -J
>  
>  
>  Alexander Kurtakov
>  Red Hat Eclipse team
>  
>  
>  > Only non Red Hat Fedora employees and
>  > the board itself can make a final decision after considering what
>  > FESCO has to say about it. Face it. Fedora 15 Gnome 3 cause a major
>  > uproar. Anaconda on RHEL6 is easier to use than Anaconda 18. Almost
>  > 3 years later and "oh yeah we realized we should probably add a
>  > real
>  > "fallback" mode to Gnome 3. Meanwhile the main people writing code
>  > are not the community. Meanwhile MATE is lighter weight than Gnome
>  > 2.3, has numerous bug fixes, will have full support for
>  > systems/logind.. Something even Gnome 3 still has trouble with.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > Is it really that scary for you guys to think about something else
>  > besides Gnome 3 and KDE?
>  > 
>  > 
>  > Not enough support? Then step up and quit whining. You know how to
>  > help, Red Hat employees. Don't be selfish. This is Fedora not RHEL.
>  > This is a community based distribution not Red Hats playground.
>  > Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > Everyone loves to dance around the fact about what Fedora is or
>  > isn't.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like
>  > it. Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are
>  > less people using Fedora.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press
>  > coverage
>  > in Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last
>  > 30
>  > days. It hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda
>  > 18.
>  > You are on serious drugs if you believe that.
>  > 
>  > 
>  > Dan
>  > --
>  > devel mailing list
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  
>  
>  --
>  http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/
>  ------------------------------------------------
>  in your fear, seek only peace
>  in your fear, seek only love
>  
>  -d. bowie
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:10:03 -0500,
   Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> Nor I wanted it to be - Fight fire with fire! People that start personal attacks on
> fedora-devel list should be BANNED. 
People should not fight people behaving badly be emulating their behavior. It 
is better to remain polite while reminding them their behavior is 
inappropriate and explaining the consequences of continuing to behave badly.

[Aleksandar Kurtakov]

----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Bruno Wolff III" <bruno(a)wolff.to&gt;
>  To: "Aleksandar Kurtakov" <akurtako(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  Cc: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 6:08:29 PM
>  Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
>  
>  On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:10:03 -0500,
>     Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  >Nor I wanted it to be - Fight fire with fire! People that start
>  >personal attacks on fedora-devel list should be BANNED.
>  
>  People should not fight people behaving badly be emulating their
>  behavior. It
>  is better to remain polite while reminding them their behavior is
>  inappropriate and explaining the consequences of continuing to behave
>  badly. 
Everything has it's limits and once you lose all hopes to resolve something in a
civilized (in this case technical) way -  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_burn

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 11:15:31 -0500 (EST)
Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  ----- Original Message -----
>  > From: "Bruno Wolff III" <bruno(a)wolff.to&gt;
>  > To: "Aleksandar Kurtakov" <akurtako(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  > Cc: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
>  > <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013
>  > 6:08:29 PM Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default
>  > Desktop
>  > 
>  > On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:10:03 -0500,
>  >    Aleksandar Kurtakov <akurtako(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > >
>  > >Nor I wanted it to be - Fight fire with fire! People that start
>  > >personal attacks on fedora-devel list should be BANNED.
>  > 
>  > People should not fight people behaving badly be emulating their
>  > behavior. It
>  > is better to remain polite while reminding them their behavior is
>  > inappropriate and explaining the consequences of continuing to
>  > behave badly.
>  
>  Everything has it's limits and once you lose all hopes to resolve
>  something in a civilized (in this case technical) way -
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_burn 
This threadlet (and perhaps the entire thread) aren't that helpful
anymore. 

Please consider this closed, additional posts may result in moderation. 

kevin

[Lennart Poettering]

On Tue, 29.01.13 04:13, Dan Mashal (dan.mashal(a)gmail.com) wrote:

>  There could be different "flavors" of Gnome. Now I know
> that we are both
>  biased here, however what it really feels like here is REDHAT
>  employees want Gnome 3 and they are giving a bunch of bullshit excuses on 
You know, Red Hat engineers are community members, too. Much like in the
broader community there are RH engineers who are pro-GNOME and others
who are anti-GNOME, or some who are pro-systemd and others who are
anti-systemd. And these engineers tend to express their views pretty
freely on a mailing list like this too.

Hence it's not fair to assume RH as a single entity was trying to
influence more here than others, and it's not fair to imply that not
allowing RH folks to say their opinion would provide a fairer,
closer-to-the-truth picture of opinions on GNOME either.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.

[Michael Scherer]

Dear Dan, 

Le mardi 29 janvier 2013 à 04:13 -0800, Dan Mashal a écrit :

>  Now I know that we are both biased here, however what it really
> feels
>  like here is REDHAT  
If I may interrupt you, that's written in 2 words, Red Hat. Not wanting
to deviate from your discourse with my rambling about the red baseball
cap of the founder, may I just request that please respect the official
spelling as a true gentleman ?

>  employees want Gnome 3 and they are giving a bunch of bullshit
> excuses
>  on why it should be, referencing various stupid apple to orange
>  comparisons from 10 years ago. Why don't we take a poll where no Red
>  Hat employees can vote. Only non Red Hat Fedora employees and the
>  board itself can make a final decision after considering what FESCO
>  has to say about it. 
Again, if i may, from a purely mathematics point of view,  either your
poll would be significantly different without 5000 people, or you don't.

If you think 5000 people can make a significant difference ( and I say
5000, but in practice, more than half of them would not take interest
due to them not being on technical side of the things, and I would
estimate that more than half of the remaining being on others projects
than the linux distribution would not also honor us of their opinion
either ), I would dare to say that your sample is pretty small. 

If we suppose those 5000 persons can make a huge difference in the poll
( huge difference being more than 5%, all voting to gnome 3 ), that mean
that a poll would have less than 100 000 users. While that seems a lot
for the casual observer, that would be only 5% of the unique visitors to
the main website, according to
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics#fedoraproject.org_unique_visitors ).

So if we take a estimation where everybody visiting the website vote,
those 5000 people would represent 0.25% of the potential sample based on
past measures, and that's almost nothing.

And that's a supposition of having 5% of difference to be significant
while your thesis is that so many people want something else than gnome
3 than 5% shouldn't really matter.

If you don't think these 5000 people make a difference at all ( ie 0.25%
of the people who would see the poll, without any slashdot announce or
anything ), then why exclude them ?

Even if we consider they all ask to their household to answer the poll
( a quite dishonest move IMHO and be assured that I would not do it and
firmly encourage others to not do it either), that would maybe go to 1%.
Let's say 2% if they ask to their neighbours in exchange of some
chocolat cakes ( oh yes, chocolate cake, there is such felony theses
days ). 

On the other hand, based on what happened to Mandriva a few months
( around summer 2012 ) for the name of their new foundation, it doesn't
take much to derail a poll, as they would explain if you ask them
nicely. 

And while I focused on the purely mathematical part of your bold
proposal, I would add that exclusion of a rather significant part of the
community do not seems like a good idea to promote cooperation. You see,
my noble friend, that's kinda a condition for team work such as the work
we should be doing at the moment, and should be promoted rather than
demoted.

>   Face it. Fedora 15 Gnome 3 cause a major uproar. Anaconda on RHEL6
> is
>  easier to use than Anaconda 18. Almost 3 years later and "oh yeah we
>  realized we should probably add a real "fallback" mode to Gnome 3. 
If I may again interrupt, if we count 2 years of existence of gnome
shell for public consumtion, and counting the time needed to write and
discuss with others people ( since the whole discussion of dropping
fallback come from Vincent Untz ), that would be 1.5 years, not 3.

>   Meanwhile the main people writing code are not the community. 
>   Meanwhile MATE is lighter weight than Gnome 2.3, 
If i may again interrupt, I think
you mean 3.2 or 3.4, not 2.3.

>   has numerous bug fixes, 
>  will have full support for systems/logind.. 
>  Something even Gnome 3 still has trouble with.  
So I looked and found ... 1 single
bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=869998
It is here since 4 days.

It seems that I may indeed be unable to find more, having naively typed
"logind" in the small white box of bugzilla and looked at the 10 bugs
found. Likely a shortcoming of the perfidious engine behind the website,
and so I would request that you provides the needed information in order
to overcome our mutual misunderstanding.

>  Is it really that scary for you guys to think about something else
>  besides Gnome 3 and KDE?
>
>  Not enough support? Then step up and quit whining. You know how to
>  help, Red Hat employees. 
>
>  Don't be selfish. This is Fedora not RHEL. This is a community based
>  distribution not Red Hats playground. Please feel free to correct me
>  if I'm wrong. 
>  
>  Everyone loves to dance around the fact about what Fedora is or isn't.
>  
>  
>  This isn't one persons decision and its not 2003.
>  
>  Get with the times. Your projects failed. Sure a lot of people like
>  it. Then again a lot of people don't. And we wonder why there are less
>  people using Fedora.
>  
>  And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press coverage
>  in Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last 30
>  days. It hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda 18.
>  You are on serious drugs if you believe that. 
I am delighted to announce you that Red Hat has a policy of not
tolerating drugs on the work place. So you should be utterly relieved to
know that no people posting here with a @redhat.com email should be
under the influence of any serious hallucinogens.

And I cannot speak for the others, but I have myself a pretty strict
policy of avoiding drugs and alcohols when posting on mailing lists even
when not being at the work place. 

So I think your deduction could benefit from a reassessment based on
these new facts.

Sincerely,

-- 
Michael Scherer

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 23:52 +0100, Michael Scherer wrote:

>  > And then we wonder why MATE and Cinnamon got the most press
> coverage
>  > in Fedora 18 and why there has been a huge user spike in the last 30
>  > days. It hasn't been because of systemd, Gnome 3.6, and Anaconda 18.
>  > You are on serious drugs if you believe that.
>  
>  I am delighted to announce you that Red Hat has a policy of not
>  tolerating drugs on the work place. So you should be utterly relieved to
>  know that no people posting here with a @redhat.com email should be
>  under the influence of any serious hallucinogens.
>  
>  And I cannot speak for the others, but I have myself a pretty strict
>  policy of avoiding drugs and alcohols when posting on mailing lists even
>  when not being at the work place.  
I'll drink to that!
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Matej Cepl]

On 2013-01-29, 22:52 GMT, Michael Scherer wrote:
>  I am delighted to announce you that Red Hat has a policy of not
>  tolerating drugs on the work place. So you should be utterly relieved to
>  know that no people posting here with a @redhat.com email should be
>  under the influence of any serious hallucinogens. 
Some of Red Hat people are remotees, working from home. ;)

Matěj

[Bruno Wolff III]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 23:15:55 +0100,
   Matej Cepl <mcepl(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> On 2013-01-29, 22:52 GMT, Michael Scherer wrote:
> > I am delighted to announce you that Red Hat has a policy of not
> > tolerating drugs on the work place. So you should be utterly relieved to
> > know that no people posting here with a @redhat.com email should be
> > under the influence of any serious hallucinogens.
>
> Some of Red Hat people are remotees, working from home. ;) 
And even at the office, I doubt they really ban all drugs. Really, no 
Moutain Dew?

[Christopher Meng]

This topic seems becoming useless.

If possible, I think me and other ambassadors will take a survey in China.
;)

Ps. I agreed Matej' b opinion.

[Paul Wouters]

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Bruno Wolff III wrote:

> > On 2013-01-29, 22:52 GMT, Michael Scherer wrote:
> >> I am delighted to announce you that Red Hat has a policy of not
> >> tolerating drugs on the work place. So you should be utterly relieved to
> >> know that no people posting here with a @redhat.com email should be
> >> under the influence of any serious hallucinogens.
> > 
> > Some of Red Hat people are remotees, working from home. ;)
>
>  And even at the office, I doubt they really ban all drugs. Really, no Moutain 
>  Dew? 
I can only speak for Red Hat Canada, when I say that in our country,
there is no caffeine in Mountain Dew.

but more on topic, having disliked the reduced functionality of gnome3
when it replaced my beloved gnome2, I tried out cinnamon, and well. I
went back to gnome3. The bottom panel did not work as with gnome2,
changing the size of the panel (my eyes suck) did not increase the size
of the icons on it. Changing window focus felt like a first person
shooter. But I _could_ get a date displayed in the top panel!

Changing the default a few times just means we are guaranteed to annoy _everyone_

Now if only "cannot display date with the time in top panel" could be
a gnome3 blocker bug, that would be one less gnome3 issue. The other
major one of notifications being seemingly overengineered while still
being pretty useless probably is a bigger issue :/

Paul

[Tom Hughes]

On 01/02/13 17:20, Paul Wouters wrote:

>  Now if only "cannot display date with the time in top
> panel" could be
>  a gnome3 blocker bug, that would be one less gnome3 issue. 
You know you can turn the date on with gnome-tweak-tool right? or just 
with this:

gsettings set org.gnome.desktop.interface clock-show-date true

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (tom(a)compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

[Jerry James]

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Paul Wouters <pwouters(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Now if only "cannot display date with the time in top
> panel" could be
>  a gnome3 blocker bug, that would be one less gnome3 issue. The other
>  major one of notifications being seemingly overengineered while still
>  being pretty useless probably is a bigger issue :/ 
Run gnome-tweak-tool.  Choose "Shell" in the left pane.  Click "On"
next to "Show date in clock".  Enjoy!
--
Jerry James
http://www.jamezone.org/

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Paul Wouters  wrote:

>  Now if only "cannot display date with the time in top panel" could be
>  a gnome3 blocker bug, that would be one less gnome3 issue. The other
>  major one of notifications being seemingly overengineered while still
>  being pretty useless probably is a bigger issue :/ 

It is possible to display date with time in the panel just fine.  use
gnome-tweak-tool to do that.  I agree that notifications are problematic
however.   I had to install a extension just to get to know when a open
window in pidgin is getting new messages.

https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/258/notifications-alert-on-user-menu/

Rahul

[Kevin Kofler]

Matthias Clasen wrote:
>  - Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is
> [now] a full
>  fork of mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and bug-fixes are not
>  going either way... 
Those are applications which form the workspace, not random "components". 
I'm fairly sure that when they speak about reusing GNOME components, they 
really mean the libraries and the standalone applications, not the 
workspace.

(For those familiar with KDE, what they're forking is only the GNOME 
equivalent of kde-workspace and not all the other components of GNOME.)

        Kevin Kofler

[Mark Bidewell]

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at&gt;wrote:

>  Matthias Clasen wrote:
>  > - Cinnamon started out as 'using GNOME components', but it is [now] a
>  full
>  > fork of mutter, gnome-shell and nautilus, at least, and bug-fixes are not
>  > going either way...
>
>  Those are applications which form the workspace, not random "components".
>  I'm fairly sure that when they speak about reusing GNOME components, they
>  really mean the libraries and the standalone applications, not the
>  workspace.
>
>  (For those familiar with KDE, what they're forking is only the GNOME
>  equivalent of kde-workspace and not all the other components of GNOME.)
>
>          Kevin Kofler
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>  
I would oppose Cinnamon as a default on stability/maturity grounds.  The
last time I tried Cinnamon (granted this was on Ubuntu) it had a lot of
problems.  For example Nemo would get into fights with the default
installed nautilus resulting in no desktop icons. The massive forking of
underlying components could easily create problems. KDE however is a tested
desktop which I would love to see as the default (or as others have
proposed a "no default").  In my opinion Fedora ships the best KDE around.
 Although early signs seem to point to Kubuntu 13.04 really improving under
Blue Systems TLC.

-- 
Mark Bidewell
http://www.linkedin.com/in/markbidewell

[Adam Williamson]

On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 14:53 +0000, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>  
>  Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt; 
Just some input on a few things that have been raised in this thread:

1. What is 'default'?

The 'default' desktop in Fedora is:

* What you get when you click on the big 'Download Now!' button at
https://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora

* What is selected by default in a DVD / network install

* What's pictured in all the official screenshots in press stuff,
documentation etc

* What's documented in our official docs (mostly)

2. Can't we just not have a default?

Not really. Others have touched on this, but the websites team really
wants the simplicity of a straightforward 'Download' link that gets you
a live image, and that pretty much requires a default desktop. We also
have to have _something_ that we take pictures of for the docs. We could
not select any desktop by default in DVD / network installs, but we
tried that for F18 Alpha, IIRC, and I don't recall that anyone really
liked it.

3. What does QA test? What do you think about this?

If I can presume to speak for QA - in theory, changing the default
desktop doesn't have a huge impact on us. Our desktop validation tests
are written fairly generically, and already applicable to all desktops.
We already provide the infrastructure for testing of multiple desktops:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test

and ask users of the major Fedora desktops to provide results.

What QA actually commits to testing is the set of 'release blocking
desktops', which is currently defined - pretty much entirely for
historical reasons - as 'GNOME and KDE'. We require that the GNOME and
KDE columns on the test matrix (see above) be filled out and no release
blocking bugs in those desktops be known, before a release goes out.

If somehow this feature got accepted, what we'd do is give Cinnamon the
position currently given to 'Desktop' in that matrix, adjust the text
"The current set of release-blocking desktops is GNOME and KDE" on the
release criteria pages (obviously this feature requires Cinnamon to be
added to that set; whether it replaces one or the other, or is just
added, would have to be settled), and...that'd be about it. Obviously,
we'd then prioritize Cinnamon validation testing.

If the proposal involved adding Cinnamon to the set of release blocking
desktops, that would add 50% to our desktop validation testing workload
(3 'release blocking desktops' rather than 2), which is a chunk of extra
work but not impossible. If the proposal involved replacing one of the
existing 'release blocking desktops', our workload would be mostly
unchanged.

My entirely personal take on this is that I don't really care that much,
but I don't see a convincing case for the change. My personal opinion is
that a lot of the 'GNOME sucks and everyone's switching to Cinnamon /
MATE!' stuff in the press is inaccurate; whenever I see actual people
using Fedora, they seem to be using GNOME 3. For e.g., at FUDCon NA, I
saw a large majority of GNOME 3 systems, a few KDE systems, and I think
less than 5 people running Cinnamon or MATE. And one of those was the
MATE maintainer. :) But if somehow this change went through, I wouldn't
mind.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Gerd Hoffmann]

  Hi,

>  My entirely personal take on this is that I don't really care
> that much,
>  but I don't see a convincing case for the change. My personal opinion is
>  that a lot of the 'GNOME sucks and everyone's switching to Cinnamon /
>  MATE!' stuff in the press is inaccurate; whenever I see actual people
>  using Fedora, they seem to be using GNOME 3. For e.g., at FUDCon NA, I
>  saw a large majority of GNOME 3 systems, a few KDE systems, and I think
>  less than 5 people running Cinnamon or MATE. And one of those was the
>  MATE maintainer. :) But if somehow this change went through, I wouldn't
>  mind. 
Reminds me a bit how the KDE 4 launch went.  KDE 4.0 was horrible.  It
took a few minor releases to shake out usability+stability issues (and
also adapt 3rd party apps to the new major release).  Now-days people
are happy with KDE 4 and attempts to keep KDE 3 alive are pretty much
dead.  But IIRC it took quite some time until the KDE 4 bashing stopped.

GMOME 3 seems to run simliar.  3.0 was pretty bad, and users rightfully
complained.  Now, a few minor releases later, the most annoying stuff is
fixed and people seem[1] to be mostly happy with it.  With the ongoing
finetuning I expect the motivation to keep the alternatives alive will
go away.  I predict MATE will disappear first.  Cinnamon probably has
higher chances to stay alive for a while, but lets see where things are
in 2-3 years ...

cheers,
  Gerd

[1] /me uses KDE most of the time.

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 01/29/2013 12:50 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Sun, 2013-01-27 at 14:53 +0000, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
> >
> > Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
>  Just some input on a few things that have been raised in this thread:
>
>  1. What is 'default'?
>
>  The 'default' desktop in Fedora is:
>
>  * What you get when you click on the big 'Download Now!' button at
>  https://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora
>
>  * What is selected by default in a DVD / network install
>
>  * What's pictured in all the official screenshots in press stuff,
>  documentation etc
>
>  * What's documented in our official docs (mostly)
>
>  2. Can't we just not have a default?
>
>  Not really. Others have touched on this, but the websites team really
>  wants the simplicity of a straightforward 'Download' link that gets you
>  a live image, and that pretty much requires a default desktop. We also
>  have to have _something_ that we take pictures of for the docs. We could
>  not select any desktop by default in DVD / network installs, but we
>  tried that for F18 Alpha, IIRC, and I don't recall that anyone really
>  liked it.
>
>  3. What does QA test? What do you think about this?
>
>  If I can presume to speak for QA - in theory, changing the default
>  desktop doesn't have a huge impact on us. Our desktop validation tests
>  are written fairly generically, and already applicable to all desktops.
>  We already provide the infrastructure for testing of multiple desktops:
>
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Results:Current_Desktop_Test
>
>  and ask users of the major Fedora desktops to provide results.
>
>  What QA actually commits to testing is the set of 'release blocking
>  desktops', which is currently defined - pretty much entirely for
>  historical reasons - as 'GNOME and KDE'. We require that the GNOME and
>  KDE columns on the test matrix (see above) be filled out and no release
>  blocking bugs in those desktops be known, before a release goes out. 
The web stuff can easily be address with gnome.fedoraproject.org, 
kde.fedoraproject.org, lxde.fedoraproject.org,xfce.fedoraproject.org 
etc. each with an a "Download" button, The QA community makes the 
criteria each sub community follows the test cases and ensures that 
their spins passes. If it does it will be skipped that release cycle or 
simply released when it does ( same as secondary arch )
>  If somehow this feature got accepted, what we'd do is give Cinnamon the
>  position currently given to 'Desktop' in that matrix, adjust the text
>  "The current set of release-blocking desktops is GNOME and KDE" on the
>  release criteria pages (obviously this feature requires Cinnamon to be
>  added to that set; whether it replaces one or the other, or is just
>  added, would have to be settled), and...that'd be about it. Obviously,
>  we'd then prioritize Cinnamon validation testing.
>
>  If the proposal involved adding Cinnamon to the set of release blocking
>  desktops, that would add 50% to our desktop validation testing workload
>  (3 'release blocking desktops' rather than 2), which is a chunk of extra
>  work but not impossible. If the proposal involved replacing one of the
>  existing 'release blocking desktops', our workload would be mostly
>  unchanged. 
QA strictly tests  and focuses on the CoreOS + X and each community 
surrounding each spins cover what ever is added on top of that.

JBG

[Matej Cepl]

On 2013-01-29, 00:50 GMT, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  My entirely personal take on this is that I don't really care
> that 
>  much, but I don't see a convincing case for the change. 
My personal take on this (just that everybody seems to have to have an 
opinion on this):

 a) one of the most important conclusions from the last ten years of 
 using Linux and participating in similar discussions (BTW, I think we 
 should really change default SMTP daemon to postfix) is that adult 
 people don't argue about defaults. Newbies don't care and non-newbies 
 are able to switch them.
 
 b) of course, my deep suspicion is that Cinnamon developers want to use 
 this trollfest as an advertisement for the mere fact that Cinnamon 
 exists. Yeah, it does. I admit. Can we just stop this nonsense now?

Matěj

[Kevin Kofler]

Adam Williamson wrote:
>  2. Can't we just not have a default?
>  
>  Not really. Others have touched on this, but the websites team really
>  wants the simplicity of a straightforward 'Download' link that gets you
>  a live image, and that pretty much requires a default desktop. 
And just because the websites team "wants" that nonsense, we have to keep 
it? Seriously? That one-click download is utter nonsense: No matter what you 
pick, it will always be the wrong thing for many people. The step to 
actually pick the correct download cannot be skipped.

        Kevin Kofler

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 06:56 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  Adam Williamson wrote:
>  > 2. Can't we just not have a default?
>  > 
>  > Not really. Others have touched on this, but the websites team really
>  > wants the simplicity of a straightforward 'Download' link that gets you
>  > a live image, and that pretty much requires a default desktop.
>  
>  And just because the websites team "wants" that nonsense, we have to keep 
>  it? Seriously? That one-click download is utter nonsense: No matter what you 
>  pick, it will always be the wrong thing for many people. The step to 
>  actually pick the correct download cannot be skipped. 
...and forcing a choice - possibly between several things they are not
familiar with either in detail or in nature - is equally wrong for many
people. Probably *more* people. Lots of people don't really care what
desktop they get, and lots of people don't know what a desktop is or
what are the differences between GNOME and KDE and Xfce and LXDE and and
and and...

You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead of a
simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions about
what 'desktop environment' you want? What the hell is this crap?

Getting this right was one of the simple things Ubuntu did that helped
its initial surge in popularity over other distros at the time, BTW.
They didn't make you pass a test to download the product.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Orcan Ogetbil]

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead of a
>  simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions about
>  what 'desktop environment' you want?
>  
As I said earlier in this thread, and as the Fedora Board ratified
(link given in my previous post), this is not the type of the user
base we are targeting. There is a perfect distro for such users, and
its called Ubuntu.

>   What the hell is this crap? 
<rant>
I really don't enjoy supporting users who are unable to read 10 lines
of documentation. "What the hell this crap" is to be explained there
concisely so that they will be able to make a more informed decision
and increase their productivity.

>  Getting this right was one of the simple things Ubuntu did that
> helped
>  its initial surge in popularity over other distros at the time, BTW.
>  They didn't make you pass a test to download the product. 
Promoting laziness is a dangerous path.
</rant>

Best,
Orcan

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:14 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>  On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  >
>  > You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead of a
>  > simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions about
>  > what 'desktop environment' you want?
>  >
>  
>  As I said earlier in this thread, and as the Fedora Board ratified
>  (link given in my previous post), this is not the type of the user
>  base we are targeting. There is a perfect distro for such users, and
>  its called Ubuntu. 
Sorry, but I don't agree with your interpretation of the Board's list:

- Voluntary Linux consumer
- Computer-friendly
- Likely collaborator
- General productivity user

Which of those screams 'will clearly be familiar with the concepts of
'desktop environment', 'KDE', and 'GNOME' to you?

'Voluntary Linux consumer' doesn't mean they *already know about Linux*,
just that they have chosen to go out and try Fedora of their own accord.
So far as I can see, the classic 'been using Windows and poking around
for a while, read a news article about this Linux thing, wants to try it
out' person meets those requirements just fine. This person does not
know what a 'KDE' is.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Orcan Ogetbil]

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:32 PM, Adam Williamson  wrote:
>  On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:14 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > >
> > > You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead of a
> > > simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions about
> > > what 'desktop environment' you want?
> > >
> >
> > As I said earlier in this thread, and as the Fedora Board ratified
> > (link given in my previous post), this is not the type of the user
> > base we are targeting. There is a perfect distro for such users, and
> > its called Ubuntu.
>
>  Sorry, but I don't agree with your interpretation of the Board's list:
>  
Okay, that's fair. I respect your interpretation

>  - Voluntary Linux consumer
>  - Computer-friendly
>  - Likely collaborator
>  - General productivity user
>
>  Which of those screams 'will clearly be familiar with the concepts of
>  'desktop environment', 'KDE', and 'GNOME' to you?
>  
The combination of all of the above 4 screams to me that the target
user base shall be:
- capable of comprehend some short documentation and make a decision
on what could be the best candidate to fit in his workflow, if not
"already familiar with the concepts of  'desktop environment 'KDE',
and 'GNOME'"

The documentation can include some nice and fancy screenshots and
demonstrations as Jon proposed.

The user should also be informed that the choice is not final, and the
DE can be switched after the installation via package manager.
Does the current webpage indicate this somewhere? I could not see it.
Note that this is a side-topic, and can be discussed exclusively on
its own.

>  'Voluntary Linux consumer' doesn't mean they *already
> know about Linux*,
>  just that they have chosen to go out and try Fedora of their own accord.
>  So far as I can see, the classic 'been using Windows and poking around
>  for a while, read a news article about this Linux thing, wants to try it
>  out' person meets those requirements just fine. This person does not
>  know what a 'KDE' is. 
Then tell him.

Honestly, what kind of benefit to the community do you expect from a
user who gets confused just by looking at a couple nice screenshots
and reading some brief explanation? Have you ever met such a person
(incapable of understanding two sentences but useful to the
community)? Don't you think regarding your users this way a tad
disrespectful?

Best,
Orcan

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 21:49 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:

>  Honestly, what kind of benefit to the community do you expect from a
>  user who gets confused just by looking at a couple nice screenshots
>  and reading some brief explanation? Have you ever met such a person
>  (incapable of understanding two sentences but useful to the
>  community)? Don't you think regarding your users this way a tad
>  disrespectful? 
It's an *initial* state, not a never-changing one. When I first decided
I was going to try Linux, I wanted to try Linux. I wanted exactly what
our download page gives you - a simple link to a thing called Linux I
could download and fiddle with. I'm not sure I wanted my first encounter
with the Linux world to be a boxout explaining to me what KDE and GNOME
were and asking me to pick one or the other. These things are obviously
things I came to learn about later, but they're not the most fascinating
topic to deal with when you first decide you want to play around with
this here Linux thing.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Mathieu Bridon]

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 19:36 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 21:49 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>  
>  > Honestly, what kind of benefit to the community do you expect from a
>  > user who gets confused just by looking at a couple nice screenshots
>  > and reading some brief explanation? Have you ever met such a person
>  > (incapable of understanding two sentences but useful to the
>  > community)? Don't you think regarding your users this way a tad
>  > disrespectful?
>  
>  It's an *initial* state, not a never-changing one. When I first decided
>  I was going to try Linux, I wanted to try Linux. I wanted exactly what
>  our download page gives you - a simple link to a thing called Linux I
>  could download and fiddle with. I'm not sure I wanted my first encounter
>  with the Linux world to be a boxout explaining to me what KDE and GNOME
>  were and asking me to pick one or the other. These things are obviously
>  things I came to learn about later, but they're not the most fascinating
>  topic to deal with when you first decide you want to play around with
>  this here Linux thing. 
This is my experience as well.

The fact we have a prominent default on the download website is a very
good thing for newcomers.


-- 
Mathieu

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 04:36 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 21:49 -0500, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
>
> > Honestly, what kind of benefit to the community do you expect from a
> > user who gets confused just by looking at a couple nice screenshots
> > and reading some brief explanation? Have you ever met such a person
> > (incapable of understanding two sentences but useful to the
> > community)? Don't you think regarding your users this way a tad
> > disrespectful?
>
>  It's an *initial* state, not a never-changing one. When I first decided
>  I was going to try Linux, I wanted to try Linux. I wanted exactly what
>  our download page gives you - a simple link to a thing called Linux I
>  could download and fiddle with. I'm not sure I wanted my first encounter
>  with the Linux world to be a boxout explaining to me what KDE and GNOME
>  were and asking me to pick one or the other. 
It would have been a one time beginners encounter, you'd have forgotten 
very soon. I'd classify it as an negligible and ignoreable detail, which 
is burried in the amount of issues newcomers will have to struggle with 
later on.

That said, I'd consider this issue to be way overrated and would expect 
Fedora to bee more attractive to users, if it offered a fair choice of DEs.

>  These things are obviously
>  things I came to learn about later, but they're not the most fascinating
>  topic to deal with when you first decide you want to play around with
>  this here Linux thing. 
I think you are putting too much emphasize on "first-timers" and seem to 
be forgetting the "Linux distro switcher-users". For them, easily 
finding the DE they know from their so-far used distro and easily 
switching between alternative DEs would be an important feature.

Ralf

[Michael Scherer]

Le mardi 05 février 2013 à 06:43 +0100, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :

>  I think you are putting too much emphasize on
> "first-timers" and seem to 
>  be forgetting the "Linux distro switcher-users". For them, easily 
>  finding the DE they know from their so-far used distro and easily 
>  switching between alternative DEs would be an important feature. 
Last time I checked, people were fully able to switch DE after
installation. Did this point change, or is it too hard to do for a
regular linux user, cause maybe that would be the point to improve ?


-- 
Michael Scherer

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 07:40 AM, Michael Scherer wrote:
>  Le mardi 05 février 2013 à 06:43 +0100, Ralf Corsepius a écrit :
>
> > I think you are putting too much emphasize on "first-timers" and seem to
> > be forgetting the "Linux distro switcher-users". For them, easily
> > finding the DE they know from their so-far used distro and easily
> > switching between alternative DEs would be an important feature.
>
>  Last time I checked, people were fully able to switch DE after
>  installation. 
For advanced users it's possible to switch the DE - For
beginners, I 
feel it's close to impossible.

>  Did this point change, 
It did change insofar, as it has become increasingly difficult.

>  or is it too hard to do for a
>  regular linux user, cause maybe that would be the point to improve ? 
Keep in mind that to get to the point of installing an "alternative-only 
DE", in current Fedora, you normally first have a full blown Gnome3 
installed, which is close to impossible to get rid of.

Ralf

[Debarshi Ray]

>  Keep in mind that to get to the point of installing an
> "alternative-only 
>  DE", in current Fedora, you normally first have a full blown Gnome3 
>  installed, which is close to impossible to get rid of. 
[citation needed]

Cheers,
Debarshi

-- 
If computers are going to revolutionize education, then steam engines and cars
and electricity would have done it too.  -- Arjun Shankar

[Kevin Kofler]

Debarshi Ray wrote:

> > Keep in mind that to get to the point of installing an
> "alternative-only
> > DE", in current Fedora, you normally first have a full blown Gnome3
> > installed, which is close to impossible to get rid of.
>  
>  [citation needed] 
There's no straightforward way to remove GNOME: "yum groupremove
gnome-desktop" does NOT work, it removes half of the distro. (In fact, "yum 
groupremove" is entirely useless as implemented right now, let's see whether 
the "groups as objects" feature will make it work any better or even worse.)

        Kevin Kofler

[Kevin Kofler]

Adam Williamson wrote:
>  It's an *initial* state, not a never-changing one. When I first
> decided
>  I was going to try Linux, I wanted to try Linux. I wanted exactly what
>  our download page gives you - a simple link to a thing called Linux I
>  could download and fiddle with. I'm not sure I wanted my first encounter
>  with the Linux world to be a boxout explaining to me what KDE and GNOME
>  were and asking me to pick one or the other. These things are obviously
>  things I came to learn about later, but they're not the most fascinating
>  topic to deal with when you first decide you want to play around with
>  this here Linux thing. 
The desktop environment is going to be the main piece of software they're 
going to try out and a major part of the user experience they'll be getting. 
If you make the wrong choice for them, not telling them about the options at 
all, they'll end up disgusted of that "Linux" thing and will go back to the

proprietary OS they used before, never to be seen again, and they'll never 
even realize that a better desktop exists.

        Kevin Kofler

[Przemek Klosowski]

On 02/04/2013 09:49 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:

>  The user should also be informed that the choice is not final, and
> the
>  DE can be switched after the installation via package manager.
>  Does the current webpage indicate this somewhere? I could not see it. 
What's worse is that it's harder than it used to be to change the 
desktop---desktop style is no longer a login-time selection. In fact, I 
am not sure what is the recommended method nowadays--- groupinstall KDE 
+ groupremove Gnome? but this can't be right for XFCE which I think 
shares stuff with Gnome..

I agree with Adam that the solution isn't to force a choice early on, 
but the flip side of it is that it should be easier to choose on an 
installed system.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Przemek Klosowski  wrote:

>  What's worse is that it's harder than it used to be to change the
>  desktop---desktop style is no longer a login-time selection.
>  
It certainly is.  Every login manager offers that option

Rahul

[Przemek Klosowski]

On 02/05/2013 12:00 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>  On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
>
>      What's worse is that it's harder than it used to be to change the
>      desktop---desktop style is no longer a login-time selection.
>
>  It certainly is.  Every login manager offers that option 
Ah, another dummkopf moment for me---it only shows up when you actually 
installed the alternatives ('yum groupinstall xfce').
In retrospect it makes sense, but is not very discoverable.

[Tom Hughes]

On 05/02/13 16:58, Przemek Klosowski wrote:

>  What's worse is that it's harder than it used to be to change
> the
>  desktop---desktop style is no longer a login-time selection. In fact, I
>  am not sure what is the recommended method nowadays--- groupinstall KDE
>  + groupremove Gnome? but this can't be right for XFCE which I think
>  shares stuff with Gnome.. 
If you want to change what display manager is used then just change what 
/etc/systemd/system/display-manager.service points to.

What desktop a display manager starts will be a display manager specific 
configuration option.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (tom(a)compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 17:17 +0000, Tom Hughes wrote:
>  On 05/02/13 16:58, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
>  
>  > What's worse is that it's harder than it used to be to change the
>  > desktop---desktop style is no longer a login-time selection. In fact, I
>  > am not sure what is the recommended method nowadays--- groupinstall KDE
>  > + groupremove Gnome? but this can't be right for XFCE which I think
>  > shares stuff with Gnome..
>  
>  If you want to change what display manager is used then just change what 
>  /etc/systemd/system/display-manager.service points to.
>  
>  What desktop a display manager starts will be a display manager specific 
>  configuration option. 
...but as Rahul said, they all allow you to log in to any desktop. There
seems to be a meme in this thread that GDM does not, but that's not
correct, it does. The choice is not visible unless you actually have
multiple desktops installed, but when you do, it gives you the option.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 07:49 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 17:17 +0000, Tom Hughes wrote:
> > On 05/02/13 16:58, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> >
> >> What's worse is that it's harder than it used to be to change the
> >> desktop---desktop style is no longer a login-time selection. In fact, I
> >> am not sure what is the recommended method nowadays--- groupinstall KDE
> >> + groupremove Gnome? but this can't be right for XFCE which I think
> >> shares stuff with Gnome..
> >
> > If you want to change what display manager is used then just change what
> > /etc/systemd/system/display-manager.service points to.
> >
> > What desktop a display manager starts will be a display manager specific
> > configuration option.
>
>  ...but as Rahul said, they all allow you to log in to any desktop. There
>  seems to be a meme in this thread that GDM does not, but that's not
>  correct, it does. The choice is not visible unless you actually have
>  multiple desktops installed, but when you do, it gives you the option. 
I know this applies, but installing gnome-shell pulls in gdm.

I.e. removing gdm without removing gnone-shell is not possible.

Ralf

[Mathieu Bridon]

On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 10:01 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  On 02/05/2013 07:49 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  > On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 17:17 +0000, Tom Hughes wrote:
>  >> On 05/02/13 16:58, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
>  >>
>  >>> What's worse is that it's harder than it used to be to change the
>  >>> desktop---desktop style is no longer a login-time selection. In fact, I
>  >>> am not sure what is the recommended method nowadays--- groupinstall KDE
>  >>> + groupremove Gnome? but this can't be right for XFCE which I think
>  >>> shares stuff with Gnome..
>  >>
>  >> If you want to change what display manager is used then just change what
>  >> /etc/systemd/system/display-manager.service points to.
>  >>
>  >> What desktop a display manager starts will be a display manager specific
>  >> configuration option.
>  >
>  > ...but as Rahul said, they all allow you to log in to any desktop. There
>  > seems to be a meme in this thread that GDM does not, but that's not
>  > correct, it does. The choice is not visible unless you actually have
>  > multiple desktops installed, but when you do, it gives you the option.
>  
>  I know this applies, but installing gnome-shell pulls in gdm. 
Wouldn't that just be a packaging bug?

gnome-shell requires gdm-libs
gdm requires gdm-libs

The requirement gdm-libs has on gdm seems unneeded at first glance.


-- 
Mathieu

[Debarshi Ray]

>  I know this applies, but installing gnome-shell pulls in gdm.
>  
>  I.e. removing gdm without removing gnone-shell is not possible. 
Because gnome-shell (running in a special mode) is nowadays the greeter used
by GDM. That does not mean GDM won't let you log into KDE if you have it
installed.

As for GDM requiring gnome-shell, I don't think it should come across as
surprising because GDM is GNOME's display manager. If you dislike GNOME so
much then get yourself a different display manager.

Cheers,
Debarshi

-- 
If computers are going to revolutionize education, then steam engines and cars
and electricity would have done it too.  -- Arjun Shankar

[Kevin Kofler]

Debarshi Ray wrote:

> > I know this applies, but installing gnome-shell pulls in gdm.
> > 
> > I.e. removing gdm without removing gnone-shell is not possible.
>  
>  Because gnome-shell (running in a special mode) is nowadays the greeter
>  used by GDM. That does not mean GDM won't let you log into KDE if you have
>  it installed.
>  
>  As for GDM requiring gnome-shell, I don't think it should come across as
>  surprising because GDM is GNOME's display manager. If you dislike GNOME so
>  much then get yourself a different display manager. 
It's the opposite dependency he's complaining about, gnome-shell requires 
gdm-libs, which requires gdm for some reason.

        Kevin Kofler

[Kevin Kofler]

Adam Williamson wrote:
>  ...but as Rahul said, they all allow you to log in to any desktop.
> There
>  seems to be a meme in this thread that GDM does not, but that's not
>  correct, it does. The choice is not visible unless you actually have
>  multiple desktops installed, but when you do, it gives you the option. 
Last I checked, GDM also hid that feature so well that many users missed it. 
In fact, unless this changed recently, when you input your user name, the 
option is NOT shown, it only appears after you confirm your user name, 
during the password prompt.

        Kevin Kofler

[Adam Williamson]

On 09/02/13 01:03 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  Adam Williamson wrote:
> > ...but as Rahul said, they all allow you to log in to any desktop. There
> > seems to be a meme in this thread that GDM does not, but that's not
> > correct, it does. The choice is not visible unless you actually have
> > multiple desktops installed, but when you do, it gives you the option.
>
>  Last I checked, GDM also hid that feature so well that many users missed it.
>  In fact, unless this changed recently, when you input your user name, the
>  option is NOT shown, it only appears after you confirm your user name,
>  during the password prompt. 
Well, yes, that's true. How does that count as 'well hidden'? It's not 
like you can login without entering your password.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Martin Sourada]

On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:13:08 -0800 
Adam Williamson wrote:

>  On 09/02/13 01:03 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  > Last I checked, GDM also hid that feature so well that many users
>  > missed it. In fact, unless this changed recently, when you input
>  > your user name, the option is NOT shown, it only appears after you
>  > confirm your user name, during the password prompt.
>  
>  Well, yes, that's true. How does that count as 'well hidden'? It's
>  not like you can login without entering your password. 
What about users *without*
password? It's insecure (in most cases), but
possible. 

But yes, we have other DMs, so why bother with pointing out
what we believe GDM does wrong, when there's a DM that does it right
and is supported in Fedora? I've abandoned GDM myself when it started
using gnome shell and since then I haven't got the urge to point out
that it's unusable (meaning inconvenient, non-effective to use) for me,
because I can use something different now (many thanks to the people
who got LightDM into Fedora and made it work).

Martin

[Michael Scherer]

Le samedi 16 février 2013 à 00:15 +0100, Martin Sourada a écrit :
>  On Thu, 14 Feb 2013 19:13:08 -0800 
>  Adam Williamson wrote:
>  
>  > On 09/02/13 01:03 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  > > Last I checked, GDM also hid that feature so well that many users
>  > > missed it. In fact, unless this changed recently, when you input
>  > > your user name, the option is NOT shown, it only appears after you
>  > > confirm your user name, during the password prompt.
>  > 
>  > Well, yes, that's true. How does that count as 'well hidden'? It's
>  > not like you can login without entering your password.
>  What about users *without* password? It's insecure (in most cases), but
>  possible.  
One potential idea would be to just show the password prompt and wait to
type "enter". 

But if that's not how it work now ( I didn't test ), I guess opening a
bug on bugs.gnome.org is the way to have it fixed.

-- 
Michael Scherer

[Olav Vitters]

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 12:15:10AM +0100, Martin Sourada wrote:
>  What about users *without* password? It's insecure (in most
> cases), but
>  possible.  
That is a known tradeoff/bug. IMO this is a case of 'it hurts when I do
this'. Tradeoff is how often you have a nicer experience (showing the
right session that will be selected) vs use cases that are broken or
less nice.

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Kevin Kofler]

Adam Williamson wrote:

>  On 09/02/13 01:03 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Last I checked, GDM also hid that feature so well that many users missed
> > it. In fact, unless this changed recently, when you input your user name,
> > the option is NOT shown, it only appears after you confirm your user
> > name, during the password prompt.
>  
>  Well, yes, that's true. How does that count as 'well hidden'? It's not
>  like you can login without entering your password. 
I call it "well hidden" because real users have come complaining to
#fedora-kde claiming GDM "does not support" running anything other than 
GNOME, and when I explained how to find it, they said they had completely 
missed that and rightfully complained about how hard to find it was.

Of course, as the GDM developers only ever linger on GNOME-centric chans, 
they never get these user complaints, so they keep congratulating themselves 
on the "great improved" UI. Several people on #fedora-kde see this UI as a 
way to push the agenda of making users not even realize there's an 
alternative to GNOME.

        Kevin Kofler

[Samuel Sieb]

On 02/15/2013 06:17 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  Adam Williamson wrote:
> > Well, yes, that's true. How does that count as 'well hidden'? It's
> not
> > like you can login without entering your password.
>
>  I call it "well hidden" because real users have come complaining to
>  #fedora-kde claiming GDM "does not support" running anything other than
>  GNOME, and when I explained how to find it, they said they had completely
>  missed that and rightfully complained about how hard to find it was.
>  
My understanding is that the session list is dependent on the user 
selected.  At least the default session is, so it made sense to wait 
until a user is chosen before showing the list.

[Olav Vitters]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 06:20:52PM -0800, Samuel Sieb wrote:
>  My understanding is that the session list is dependent on the user
>  selected.  At least the default session is, so it made sense to wait
>  until a user is chosen before showing the list. 
Using this you can show the correct default session for that user.

You have two possibilities:

1. Show sessions before selecting/entering the user:
   Means basically including something like 'default session' or
   'previous session' 
2. Show sessions after selecting/entering the user:
   Means you can show the actual session that will be chosen.

There are tradeoffs between both of them, GDM chose #2, making some
stuff nicer, some stuff worse. It would be nice if someone would do a
usability study on this (maybe session selector should be more obvious
or something… thinking of maybe a list instead of a dropdown).

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Kevin Kofler]

Olav Vitters wrote:
>  1. Show sessions before selecting/entering the user:
>     Means basically including something like 'default session' or
>     'previous session' 
That's how the rest of the world does it…

>  2. Show sessions after selecting/entering the user:
>     Means you can show the actual session that will be chosen.
>  
>  There are tradeoffs between both of them, GDM chose #2, 
… but of course GNOME just had to be different.

        Kevin Kofler

[Olav Vitters]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 02:14:30PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  Olav Vitters wrote:
>  > 1. Show sessions before selecting/entering the user:
>  >    Means basically including something like 'default session' or
>  >    'previous session'
>  
>  That's how the rest of the world does it…
>  
>  > 2. Show sessions after selecting/entering the user:
>  >    Means you can show the actual session that will be chosen.
>  > 
>  > There are tradeoffs between both of them, GDM chose #2,
>  
>  … but of course GNOME just had to be different. 
If you don't have anything constructive to add, then don't respond.

I mentioned the aim: what is usability wise best.

I mentioned that it might not be best, tradeoffs taken, and how to make
changes.

A one liner about:
"but of course GNOME just had to be different"

I just a bit easy. Try challenging what I said instead of a one liner.
Try maybe showing a usability story where the chosen solution is not
great. I mean, try something in the bits I said earlier.

Regarding "had to be different": I already explained that it was not
about "had to be different". Moreover, wtf is wrong with trying to go
for trying a better solution? Not like things are stuck forever, as I
already indicated.

I'm trying to collect feedback, I'd expect some respect instead of one
liners. Loads of people working in Fedora don't follow devel@ because of
the attitude displayed here. I often get questioned wtf I spend the time
to proceed anyway.

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Ian Malone]

On 18 February 2013 10:37, Olav Vitters <olav(a)vitters.nl&gt; wrote:


>  I'm trying to collect feedback, I'd expect some respect
> instead of one
>  liners. Loads of people working in Fedora don't follow devel@ because of
>  the attitude displayed here. I often get questioned wtf I spend the time
>  to proceed anyway.
>  
It turns out to be very difficult to express a less than favourable
opinion about an aspect of Gnome without getting drawn into a wide
ranging discussion which ends with you being labelled as a Gnome hater
whose opinion can therefore be discounted.

-- 
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk

[Mathieu Bridon]

On 02/18/2013 07:58 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
>  On 18 February 2013 10:37, Olav Vitters <olav(a)vitters.nl&gt;
> wrote:
>
>
> > I'm trying to collect feedback, I'd expect some respect instead of one
> > liners. Loads of people working in Fedora don't follow devel@ because of
> > the attitude displayed here. I often get questioned wtf I spend the time
> > to proceed anyway.
> >
>
>  It turns out to be very difficult to express a less than favourable
>  opinion about an aspect of Gnome without getting drawn into a wide
>  ranging discussion which ends with you being labelled as a Gnome hater
>  whose opinion can therefore be discounted. 
That's just not true.

Many people manage very well to express less than favourable opinions 
about GNOME while remaining respectful and courteous.

That's called "reporting a bug", and (as far as I'm concerned) it 
actually works, especially when you're specific. You should try it:
     https://bugzilla.gnome.org


-- 
Mathieu

[Ian Malone]

On 18 February 2013 12:57, Mathieu Bridon <bochecha(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  On 02/18/2013 07:58 PM, Ian Malone wrote:
> >
> > On 18 February 2013 10:37, Olav Vitters <olav(a)vitters.nl&gt; wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I'm trying to collect feedback, I'd expect some respect instead of one
> >> liners. Loads of people working in Fedora don't follow devel@ because of
> >> the attitude displayed here. I often get questioned wtf I spend the time
> >> to proceed anyway.
> >>
> >
> > It turns out to be very difficult to express a less than favourable
> > opinion about an aspect of Gnome without getting drawn into a wide
> > ranging discussion which ends with you being labelled as a Gnome hater
> > whose opinion can therefore be discounted.
>
>
>  That's just not true.
>
>  Many people manage very well to express less than favourable opinions about
>  GNOME while remaining respectful and courteous.
>
>  That's called "reporting a bug", and (as far as I'm concerned) it
> actually
>  works, especially when you're specific. You should try it:
>      https://bugzilla.gnome.org
>  
It turns out to be very difficult to express a less than favourable
opinion about an aspect of Gnome without getting drawn into a wide
ranging discussion which ends with you being labelled as a Gnome hater
whose opinion can therefore be discounted.

-- 
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk

[Kevin Kofler]

Mathieu Bridon wrote:
>  That's called "reporting a bug", and (as far as I'm
> concerned) it
>  actually works, especially when you're specific. You should try it:
>       https://bugzilla.gnome.org 
LOL… Any bug report about one of GNOME's intentional "improvements" gets 
instantly closed as INVALID, NOTABUG or WONTFIX (or as a duplicate of an 
existing bug in one of these states).

        Kevin Kofler

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:

>  LOL… Any bug report about one of GNOME's intentional "improvements" gets
>  instantly closed as INVALID, NOTABUG or WONTFIX (or as a duplicate of an
>  existing bug in one of these states).
>  
This is of course a false generalization.   Some of them do.  Some of them
don't and others get reverted of fixed in other ways.  It is a more nuanced
issue.

Rahul

[Gerd Hoffmann]

>  You have two possibilities:
>  
>  1. Show sessions before selecting/entering the user:
>     Means basically including something like 'default session' or
>     'previous session' 
>  2. Show sessions after selecting/entering the user:
>     Means you can show the actual session that will be chosen.
>  
>  There are tradeoffs between both of them, GDM chose #2, 
Well, that is only one half of the story.  gdm actually moved from #1 to
#2 (IIRC with the gnome2->gnome3 switch), making people wonder why the
desktop selection disappeared ...

Took me a while to figure this (and other user-specific settings like
language) just shows up after picking the user, especially as this is
just a small change at the bottom of the screen while you are focusing
to the center where you just typed the password and where gdm now asks
for the password.

cheers,
  Gerd

[Rahul Sundaram]

On 02/15/2013 09:17 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  Several people on #fedora-kde see this UI as a way to push the agenda
>
>  of making users not even realize there's an alternative to GNOME 
Those "several people" have poor attitude when they assume malice. It is 
a poisonous thing to do

Rahul

[Kevin Kofler]

Rahul Sundaram wrote:

>  On 02/15/2013 09:17 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Several people on #fedora-kde see this UI as a way to push the agenda
> > of making users not even realize there's an alternative to GNOME
>  
>  Those "several people" have poor attitude when they assume malice. It is
>  a poisonous thing to do 
I guess in this case the principle "never ascribe to malice what can be 
adequately explained by incompetence" applies. ;-)

        Kevin Kofler

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 8:15 AM, Kevin Kofler  wrote:

>  I guess in this case the principle "never ascribe to malice what can be
>  adequately explained by incompetence" applies. ;-)
>  
I guess you are being sarcastic but assuming incompetence is slightly
better than assuming malice but the best option is to just ask why that is
in the case.  In this situation though,  we already have a explanation and
it is just a different design decision.  I suppose you won't be happy with
it unless it is the same behavior as KDE but we already have one KDE and
that is enough.

Rahul

[Jon VanAlten]

----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Adam Williamson" <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt;
>  To: "Development discussions related to Fedora"
> <devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  Sent: Monday, February 4, 2013 6:53:20 PM
>  Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
>  
>  On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 06:56 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  > Adam Williamson wrote:
>  > > 2. Can't we just not have a default?
>  > > 
>  > > Not really. Others have touched on this, but the websites team
>  > > really
>  > > wants the simplicity of a straightforward 'Download' link that
>  > > gets you
>  > > a live image, and that pretty much requires a default desktop.
>  > 
>  > And just because the websites team "wants" that nonsense, we have
>  > to keep
>  > it? Seriously? That one-click download is utter nonsense: No matter
>  > what you
>  > pick, it will always be the wrong thing for many people. The step
>  > to
>  > actually pick the correct download cannot be skipped.
>  
>  ...and forcing a choice - possibly between several things they are
>  not
>  familiar with either in detail or in nature - is equally wrong for
>  many
>  people. Probably *more* people. Lots of people don't really care what
>  desktop they get, and lots of people don't know what a desktop is or
>  what are the differences between GNOME and KDE and Xfce and LXDE and
>  and
>  and and...
>  
>  You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead of
>  a
>  simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions
>  about
>  what 'desktop environment' you want? What the hell is this crap?
>  
>  Getting this right was one of the simple things Ubuntu did that
>  helped
>  its initial surge in popularity over other distros at the time, BTW.
>  They didn't make you pass a test to download the product.
>   
There's a lot of things that Ubuntu does that Fedora will probably
never do, so that's not really an argument.

I don't have a horse in the default desktop race, being one of
those weirdo tiling window manager users, which is possibly the
exact reason why the idea of not having a default appeals to me.
Maybe, if your objection is that the choice is too hard, you are
making it too hard artificially?  For those who really are brand
new and won't really have any idea what's going to be under the
hood of any one DE, wouldn't a simple screen shot highlighting
some of the primary interfaces of the home screen be enough for
that person to say, "Hey that one looks pretty (or maybe similar
to my current desktop, or some other property that motivates my
software choices).  Now I shall click the download button below
the picture, and presumably I will get something that will look
like the picture"?  I think this is a "test" that most people
can handle (and if they can't, I frankly don't want to be the
one to support them!).  And beside the download button for each
DE can be a "more info" link, for those (possibly majority?) of
users who are more interested in learning about the image they
are about to download.  I haven't yet met a linux user who was
not driven in part by curiosity.  Maybe I don't get out enough.

This is just one idea of how a selection of different DE can be
presented without it being an onerous choice, I'm sure the most
excellent UI-oriented people we have contributing to Fedora can
come up with something much much better.

tl'dr: Please leave the straw man "new users won't be able to
decide" argument at the door, there's a way around it if we can
think about the *best* way to do it, rather than the *worst*.

cheers,
jon

ps: the horse I *do* have a race in is which ever one can stop
this endless "mine is better and should be the default"
argument (not that this is the position I think you're taking,
Adam!!).  The way it seems to be going now, there will be some
group(s) left offended at the end of F19 release cycle, and
then we'll have the same thread during F20, rinse, repeat.

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:35 -0500, Jon VanAlten wrote:

>  tl'dr: Please leave the straw man "new users won't be
> able to
>  decide" argument at the door, there's a way around it if we can
>  think about the *best* way to do it, rather than the *worst*. 
It's not really a straw man, though. Just about every popular distro
doesn't make the user pick a desktop before they can download.
Simplifying download pages is something many distros have done, and been
happy with the results of.

You say to ask the excellent UI-oriented people: we did, and they
designed the download page. One of the things they explicitly wanted to
do was stop forcing people to make five choices before they could
actually download anything.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Orcan Ogetbil]

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:35 -0500, Jon VanAlten wrote:
>
> > tl'dr: Please leave the straw man "new users won't be able to
> > decide" argument at the door, there's a way around it if we can
> > think about the *best* way to do it, rather than the *worst*.
>
>  It's not really a straw man, though. Just about every popular distro
>  doesn't make the user pick a desktop before they can download.
>  Simplifying download pages is something many distros have done, and been
>  happy with the results of.
>
>  You say to ask the excellent UI-oriented people: we did, and they
>  designed the download page. One of the things they explicitly wanted to
>  do was stop forcing people to make five choices before they could
>  actually download anything. 
There is some level of difference in complexity between a fork and an
electric guitar. The simplicity syndrome resembles selling them in the
same aisle in the department store. Typically one needs some more
information before buying the more complex one.

Sadly, keeping their citizens uneducated/ignorant is inscribed in the
foundation of many popular political parties governing the world. Are
we following this strategy? What for? Because it is the easiest way
out? I don't think we are trying to generate a new pop-cultural wave
or ride an existing one here.

Education is good, providing it is better. Information is your friend.
These should not be the things to fear. Hiding or deliberately not
presenting information is more scary, especially when it results in a
cap on productivity.
Please reconsider.

Thank you Adam,
Orcan

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 05:37 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 20:35 -0500, Jon VanAlten wrote:
>
> > tl'dr: Please leave the straw man "new users won't be able to
> > decide" argument at the door, there's a way around it if we can
> > think about the *best* way to do it, rather than the *worst*.
>
>  It's not really a straw man, though. Just about every popular distro
>  doesn't make the user pick a desktop before they can download. 
You should ask
"why"?

As I feel, this is primarily for one reason: The enterprises behind a 
major distros usually finance a DE and wants to see their works promoted 
as "unique feature".

This is what SUSE/Novell did with KDE, Ubuntu did with Unity and Red Hat 
does with Gnome - You may or may not share this opinion, fact is, this 
is how people perceive it.

However, fact also is, all these DE's developments have driven off 
larger groups of their former users, leading to what I call "the Linux 
DE crisis" and to an increase of "alternatives", such as MATE, Cinnamon 
or the revitalization of some "almost forgotten" "undead DEs" (xfce, 
enlightenment).

To cut a long story short: I'd recommend to embrace these "alternative 
DEs" as equal partners and not to continue classifying them as "second 
class".

Ralf

[Michael Scherer]

Le lundi 04 février 2013 à 20:35 -0500, Jon VanAlten a écrit :

>  I don't have a horse in the default desktop race, being one of
>  those weirdo tiling window manager users, which is possibly the
>  exact reason why the idea of not having a default appeals to me.
>  Maybe, if your objection is that the choice is too hard, you are
>  making it too hard artificially?  For those who really are brand
>  new and won't really have any idea what's going to be under the
>  hood of any one DE, wouldn't a simple screen shot highlighting
>  some of the primary interfaces of the home screen be enough for
>  that person to say, "Hey that one looks pretty (or maybe similar
>  to my current desktop, or some other property that motivates my
>  software choices).  Now I shall click the download button below
>  the picture, and presumably I will get something that will look
>  like the picture"?  I think this is a "test" that most people
>  can handle (and if they can't, I frankly don't want to be the
>  one to support them!).  And beside the download button for each
>  DE can be a "more info" link, for those (possibly majority?) of
>  users who are more interested in learning about the image they
>  are about to download.  I haven't yet met a linux user who was
>  not driven in part by curiosity.  Maybe I don't get out enough. 
I find that a screenshot is by no way sufficient information to choose
anything. If you look at Sugar, does the screenshot tell you anything
like "this is aimed at kids" ? Does a screenshot of a tilling wm tell
you anything about it being a tilling vm ? Can 1 screenshot express the
versatility of KDE ?

To me, the answer is no.

So then you do something else slightly more complex, like 2 minutes
movies, or you do more than 1 screenshot, this is becoming slightly more
onerous. This would for sure be good for the website, and I have yet to
see a volunteer for this, but let's assume that someone in this thread
just do it.

Either there is not enough difference between what we offer, and then,
more information will not change anything and the default is enough for
most people ( since there is no real difference ).

Or there is enough differences to warrant more explanations, and then
the download page is not really the place to ask to people to understand
the long list of difference.  

Now, if people motivated by the "no default" idea would start first by
showing a concrete proposal like a patch for the website that could be
deployed on a staging host and that could be tested rather than just
asking others to do stuff, maybe we would spend less time on the
question. In the end, if no one is motivated to do anything, nothing
will happen ( and no "I will do it only if people say this is accepted"
is not a acceptable answer. If people can invest time into arguing and
not into making, they have a wrong set of priority )

-- 
Michael Scherer

[Kevin Kofler]

Adam Williamson wrote:
>  ...and forcing a choice - possibly between several things they are
> not
>  familiar with either in detail or in nature - is equally wrong for many
>  people. Probably *more* people. Lots of people don't really care what
>  desktop they get, and lots of people don't know what a desktop is or
>  what are the differences between GNOME and KDE and Xfce and LXDE and and
>  and and...
>  
>  You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead of a
>  simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions about
>  what 'desktop environment' you want? What the hell is this crap?
>  
>  Getting this right was one of the simple things Ubuntu did that helped
>  its initial surge in popularity over other distros at the time, BTW.
>  They didn't make you pass a test to download the product. 
I don't think "distro XYZ did that" is a reasonable argument for doing 
something in Fedora, but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine 
doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their download). 
Their download button actually points to a selector, not directly to an ISO.

        Kevin Kofler

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  Adam Williamson wrote:
>  > ...and forcing a choice - possibly between several things they are not
>  > familiar with either in detail or in nature - is equally wrong for many
>  > people. Probably *more* people. Lots of people don't really care what
>  > desktop they get, and lots of people don't know what a desktop is or
>  > what are the differences between GNOME and KDE and Xfce and LXDE and and
>  > and and...
>  > 
>  > You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead of a
>  > simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions about
>  > what 'desktop environment' you want? What the hell is this crap?
>  > 
>  > Getting this right was one of the simple things Ubuntu did that helped
>  > its initial surge in popularity over other distros at the time, BTW.
>  > They didn't make you pass a test to download the product.
>  
>  I don't think "distro XYZ did that" is a reasonable argument for doing 
>  something in Fedora 
I didn't make it as an argument, I noted it as an aside. That's why it
comes second and has "BTW" in it.

>  , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine 
>  doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their download). 
>  Their download button actually points to a selector, not directly to an ISO. 
That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
when Ubuntu showed up, then? To the point where they've since been sold
two times and have never really recovered.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Eric Bergen]

I decided to check out Fedora again after a few years of using Kubuntu
after reading about the MySQL/MariaDB discussion. As a long time KDE
and Mac OS user I hope my first experience with gnome-shell will help
your discussion.

After getting Fedora installed and getting to the basic desktop I
honestly had no idea what to do. Not having a start menu or some kind
of applications or programs button is a bit confusing at first. The
only two things available to click that have any kind of meaning are
'Activities' on the left and my name on the right.

After figuring out that Activities brings up a menu of sorts and the
'dial pad' really means applications I was in business. The UI was
horribly slow while figuring this out. I eventually was able to get a
terminal up, run top, and see that gnome-shell is eating all the cpu.
After some painfully slow searching I got the nvidia driver installed
and gnome-shell started to behave.

I then went to work trying to figure out how to switch the default
desktop. I was able to get Cinnamon and MATE installed. Switching to
them was the next problem. Google returned some links about switchdesk
and system-switch-display manager both of which failed. Then I
remembered an old login screen from some other linux experience long
ago had the ability to switch the session manager.

Success! I've switched over to Cinnamon. The start style menu is back
and I am happy. I'm sure I could get used to gnome-shell but my first
experience wasn't a good one.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > ...and forcing a choice - possibly between several things they are not
> > > familiar with either in detail or in nature - is equally wrong for many
> > > people. Probably *more* people. Lots of people don't really care what
> > > desktop they get, and lots of people don't know what a desktop is or
> > > what are the differences between GNOME and KDE and Xfce and LXDE and and
> > > and and...
> > >
> > > You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead of a
> > > simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions about
> > > what 'desktop environment' you want? What the hell is this crap?
> > >
> > > Getting this right was one of the simple things Ubuntu did that helped
> > > its initial surge in popularity over other distros at the time, BTW.
> > > They didn't make you pass a test to download the product.
> >
> > I don't think "distro XYZ did that" is a reasonable argument for doing
> > something in Fedora
>
>  I didn't make it as an argument, I noted it as an aside. That's why it
>  comes second and has "BTW" in it.
>
> > , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine
> > doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their download).
> > Their download button actually points to a selector, not directly to an ISO.
>
>  That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
>  when Ubuntu showed up, then? To the point where they've since been sold
>  two times and have never really recovered.
>  --
>  Adam Williamson
>  Fedora QA Community Monkey
>  IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
>  http://www.happyassassin.net
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 


-- 
Eric Bergen
eric.bergen(a)gmail.com
http://www.ebergen.net

[Olav Vitters]

On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 09:28:16PM -0800, Eric Bergen wrote:
>  Success! I've switched over to Cinnamon. The start style menu is
> back
>  and I am happy. I'm sure I could get used to gnome-shell but my first
>  experience wasn't a good one. 
To add:
- Cinnamon was forked from gnome-shell, so any slowness you see in
  gnome-shell should be shared with Cinnamon, else the bugfix should be
  upstreamed. People have been saying that Cinnamon doesn't seem to
  include bugfixes made in gnome-shell though. Not verified/checked if
  that is true.
- GNOME 3.8 will have a new mode with some kind of start menu and a few
  other things (being vague because it is in development, not released
  yet, plus I have not tried it yet)

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 05:51 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: 
> > , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine
> > doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their download).
> > Their download button actually points to a selector, not directly to an ISO.
>
>  That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
>  when Ubuntu showed up, then? 
Is the situation Fedora is in essentially better? I feel no.

Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having 
difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
"Ubuntu is 
much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too unstable",
"Way too 
short life-cycles" are the usual answers.

>  To the point where they've since been sold
>  two times and have never really recovered. 
Yes, primarily because they did not make
enough money to satisfy their 
shareholders. Nevertheless, at least in Germany (SUSE had never played a 
major role outside of Germany), openSUSE seem to have a pretty stable 
and solid user base.

Ralf

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 07:19 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  On 02/05/2013 05:51 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  > On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  
>  >> , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine
>  >> doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their download).
>  >> Their download button actually points to a selector, not directly to an ISO.
>  >
>  > That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
>  > when Ubuntu showed up, then?
>  
>  Is the situation Fedora is in essentially better? I feel no.
>  
>  Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having 
>  difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
> "Ubuntu is 
>  much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too unstable",
> "Way too 
>  short life-cycles" are the usual answers. 
Let's not go down that path. It's far off topic. As I said, I threw that
in as an aside, it was not the main point of the post.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 07:42 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 07:19 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On 02/05/2013 05:51 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >
> >>> , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine
> >>> doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their download).
> >>> Their download button actually points to a selector, not directly to an ISO.
> >>
> >> That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
> >> when Ubuntu showed up, then?
> >
> > Is the situation Fedora is in essentially better? I feel no.
> >
> > Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having
> > difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
> "Ubuntu is
> > much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too unstable",
> "Way too
> > short life-cycles" are the usual answers.
>
>  Let's not go down that path. It's far off topic. 
I disagree. Fedora's
lack of popularity is largely thanks to these issues.

In this context, I feel the Cinnamon request rsp. the "give users a 
choice on DEs" attempts are part of an attempt to escape the at least 
one of the dead-end roads Fedora currently is stuck in (The Gnome3 
dead-end).

Ralf

[Jef Spaleta]

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
>  I disagree. Fedora's lack of popularity is largely thanks to
> these issues.
>
>  In this context, I feel the Cinnamon request rsp. the "give users a choice
>  on DEs" attempts are part of an attempt to escape the at least one of the
>  dead-end roads Fedora currently is stuck in (The Gnome3 dead-end). 
I disagree. I do not think the existence of Cinnamon as yet another
environment does anything to address any of the things  you previously
listed: "Freaks'/nerds' distro", "Ubuntu is much easier",
"Fedora
lacks soooo much", "Way too unstable", "Way too short
life-cycles." I
view your inclusion of your list as a general angst filled pile-on,
and not constructive for the feature proposal discussion.

-jef"the real solution to all these problems is openCDE, which I look
forward to proposing as default in the F20 cycle"spaleta

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 08:09 AM, Jef Spaleta wrote:
>  On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius
> <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
> > I disagree. Fedora's lack of popularity is largely thanks to these issues.
> >
> > In this context, I feel the Cinnamon request rsp. the "give users a choice
> > on DEs" attempts are part of an attempt to escape the at least one of the
> > dead-end roads Fedora currently is stuck in (The Gnome3 dead-end).
>
>  I disagree. I do not think the existence of Cinnamon as yet another
>  environment does anything to address any of the things  you previously
>  listed: "Freaks'/nerds' distro", "Ubuntu is much easier",
> "Fedora
>  lacks soooo much", "Way too unstable", "Way too short
> life-cycles." I
>  view your inclusion of your list as a general angst filled pile-on,
>  and not constructive for the feature proposal discussion. 
Absolutely no.

My points are:

* The Gnome3-suite will never fit everybody, i.e. trying to push/force 
it onto all users will never work and is not helpful to the Fedora 
community.

* Gnome3 is (ab-) using Fedora as Gnome3 test-bed. This already has 
caused a considerable damage to Fedora (and RH).

>  -jef"the real solution to all these problems is openCDE, which I
> look
>  forward to proposing as default in the F20 cycle"spaleta 
Yes, though you might have ment this as joke. I am sure there are 
people, who would support such and endeavor ;)

Ralf

[Jef Spaleta]

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
>  Absolutely no.
>
>  My points are:
>
>  * The Gnome3-suite will never fit everybody, i.e. trying to push/force it
>  onto all users will never work and is not helpful to the Fedora community.
>
>  * Gnome3 is (ab-) using Fedora as Gnome3 test-bed. This already has caused a
>  considerable damage to Fedora (and RH). 
These are different points than the you previously listed. I fear you
are severely conflating issues.
You feel gnome3 doesn't fit everybody... i doubt anyone is going to
argue against that point. But that has nothing to do with instability
or fast release cycles or not having enough stuff in the distro.

> > -jef"the real solution to all these problems is openCDE, which I look
> > forward to proposing as default in the F20 cycle"spaleta
>
>
>  Yes, though you might have ment this as joke. I am sure there are people,
>  who would support such and endeavor ;) 
My proposal is as funny as turning to Cinnamon as the default
environment. I leave it up to the reader to decide if either was
intended in a joking manner.

-jef

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 09:24 AM, Jef Spaleta wrote:
>  On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Ralf Corsepius
> <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
> > Absolutely no.
> >
> > My points are:
> >
> > * The Gnome3-suite will never fit everybody, i.e. trying to push/force it
> > onto all users will never work and is not helpful to the Fedora community.
> >
> > * Gnome3 is (ab-) using Fedora as Gnome3 test-bed. This already has caused a
> > considerable damage to Fedora (and RH).
>
>  These are different points than the you previously listed. I fear you
>  are severely conflating issues. 
Not quite.

  You never heard sentences like:
* "What you can cope with Fedora? Is the GUI still this unusable beta crap?"
  I did (Usually from Ubuntu users), and am not happy having to hear this.

* "Thanks CentOS6 came out, Gnome3 and the stuff underneath are too much 
of a hazzle to continue with Fedora" (Often heared from 
IT-professionals, who switched to Fedora from RHL).


>  You feel gnome3 doesn't fit everybody... i doubt anyone is going
> to
>  argue against that point. But that has nothing to do with instability
>  or fast release cycles or not having enough stuff in the distro. 
Sigh, let me try again: The Fedora project is pushing away Fedora users 
from Fedora, because Fedora/RH have missed that it's "new DE" (Gnome3) 
is addressing a different audience than Gnome2 did.

The Gnome3 audience is not the classical Fedora user base (Linux devs), 
it's the Android/iOS adicted "wipe/tile kidz".

I.e. if Fedora wants to keep their "old user-base" you need to offer 
them alternatives, and not to be stubborn on Gnome 3 for whatever reasons.

> >> -jef"the real solution to all these problems is openCDE,
> which I look
> >> forward to proposing as default in the F20 cycle"spaleta
> >
> >
> > Yes, though you might have ment this as joke. I am sure there are people,
> > who would support such and endeavor ;)
>
>  My proposal is as funny as turning to Cinnamon as the default
>  environment. I leave it up to the reader to decide if either was
>  intended in a joking manner. 
Agreed, as I wrote earlier on in this thread, to me, Cinnamon is not 
sufficiently away from Gnome3 to justify switching. OK with me, if other 
people want to use it, but do NOT FORCE me to use either!


Ralf

[Mathieu Bridon]

On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 11:12 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>    You never heard sentences like:
>  * "What you can cope with Fedora? Is the GUI still this unusable beta crap?"
>    I did (Usually from Ubuntu users), and am not happy having to hear this. 
You never heard Ubuntu users pondering a switch to Fedora 18 because
GNOME 3 on Ubuntu is a mix and match of GNOME components in different
versions, not working very well together?

I did.

>  Sigh, let me try again: The Fedora project is pushing away Fedora
> users 
>  from Fedora, because Fedora/RH have missed that it's "new DE" (Gnome3) 
>  is addressing a different audience than Gnome2 did.
>  
>  The Gnome3 audience is not the classical Fedora user base (Linux devs), 
>  it's the Android/iOS adicted "wipe/tile kidz".
>  
>  I.e. if Fedora wants to keep their "old user-base" you need to offer 
>  them alternatives, and not to be stubborn on Gnome 3 for whatever reasons. 
This is a gross generalization.

I was a GNOME 2 user, and am still a GNOME 3 user.

I loved GNOME 2 for their focus on simplicity and not getting in my way,
and I love GNOME 3 even more as they went even further in that
direction.

My $dayjob is to make a RHEL/Fedora derivative distro, does that fall in
what you characterize "the classical Fedora user base (Linux devs)"?

I have never owned any Android/iOS device, am I a 'Android/iOS adicted
"wipe/tile kidz"'?

Can you please stop pigeonholing people this way?

>  Agreed, as I wrote earlier on in this thread, to me, Cinnamon is not
>
>  sufficiently away from Gnome3 to justify switching. OK with me, if other 
>  people want to use it, but do NOT FORCE me to use either! 
Nobody is forcing you to do anything...

I find it surprising that you keep saying that new users should be able
to read a few paragraphs before choosing the desktop they want to
download, and yet you (a seasoned Fedora contributor) didn't manage to
read the following:

  More download options...

Or even:

  Other Options

      Formats: DVD ISOs, Physical Media
      Desktops: KDE, Xfce, GNOME, and others
      Spins: Games, Design, Security, and others
      Cloud: EC2 Cloud Images
      Secondary Arches: ARM, s390, PPC

  View more Fedora options...

That's all prominently listed on the main download page:
  http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora


-- 
Mathieu

[Stijn Hoop]

Hi,

On Tue, 05 Feb 2013 19:01:49 +0800
Mathieu Bridon <bochecha(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 11:12 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  > Sigh, let me try again: The Fedora project is pushing away Fedora
>  > users from Fedora, because Fedora/RH have missed that it's "new
>  > DE" (Gnome3) is addressing a different audience than Gnome2 did.
>  > 
>  > The Gnome3 audience is not the classical Fedora user base (Linux
>  > devs), it's the Android/iOS adicted "wipe/tile kidz".
>  > 
>  > I.e. if Fedora wants to keep their "old user-base" you need to
>  > offer them alternatives, and not to be stubborn on Gnome 3 for
>  > whatever reasons.
>  
>  This is a gross generalization.
>  
>  I was a GNOME 2 user, and am still a GNOME 3 user.
>  
>  I loved GNOME 2 for their focus on simplicity and not getting in my
>  way, and I love GNOME 3 even more as they went even further in that
>  direction.
>  
>  My $dayjob is to make a RHEL/Fedora derivative distro, does that fall
>  in what you characterize "the classical Fedora user base (Linux
>  devs)"?
>  
>  I have never owned any Android/iOS device, am I a 'Android/iOS adicted
>  "wipe/tile kidz"'?
>  
>  Can you please stop pigeonholing people this way? 
Normally I try not to do this, but: what he said.

I would like to add a voice to the people having successfully switched
from GNOME 2 to GNOME 3. In fact, I started out with FVWM and have run
IRIX and SunOS desktops as well, before I got onto GNOME 1. If that does
not make me an old fart, I do not know what will. Compared to GNOME 2 I
really like GNOME 3, even with the remaining warts that I still
encounter (multiscreen support is not yet *there* for me mostly). And
no, I do not even run many extensions, just the ALT-TAB one.

I know lots of people are unhappy with "being forced to run GNOME 3",
but as has been pointed out in this thread that is a stretch if
anything. Even before installation it is possible to choose a distro,
after installation as well. Valid points in my eyes are that it should
maybe be even easier to switch DE's, either before or after install,
but there is nothing in there that makes it necessary to switch the
*default*.

--Stijn

[Olav Vitters]

On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 02:22:21PM +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote:
>  Normally I try not to do this, but: what he said. 
Vincent Untz asked for a show of hands of people who used GNOME 2, GNOME
3, switched, etc. Recommend seeing the FOSDEM video. Loads of people
indicated that they use GNOME 3, though less than GNOME 2. A while later
he asked who loved GNOME 3. Not sure how many GNOME 3 users love it due
to the time difference. There was one person who uses GNOME 3 and at the
same time hates it.

Anyway, recommend seeing the video once available, better than my guesswork :)

Note: due to the topic ("GNOME community gone crazy?"), I didn't expect
that many people who liked it would join actually. Note that the people
who work on GNOME in some way sat together, only judged on people I did
not recognize as people who help out GNOME in some way.

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Jon Ciesla]

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Jef Spaleta <jspaleta(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Ralf Corsepius
> <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt;
>  wrote:
>  > I disagree. Fedora's lack of popularity is largely thanks to these
>  issues.
>  >
>  > In this context, I feel the Cinnamon request rsp. the "give users a
>  choice
>  > on DEs" attempts are part of an attempt to escape the at least one of the
>  > dead-end roads Fedora currently is stuck in (The Gnome3 dead-end).
>
>  I disagree. I do not think the existence of Cinnamon as yet another
>  environment does anything to address any of the things  you previously
>  listed: "Freaks'/nerds' distro", "Ubuntu is much easier",
> "Fedora
>  lacks soooo much", "Way too unstable", "Way too short
> life-cycles." I
>  view your inclusion of your list as a general angst filled pile-on,
>  and not constructive for the feature proposal discussion.
>
>  -jef"the real solution to all these problems is openCDE, which I look
>  forward to proposing as default in the F20 cycle"spaleta
>  
<spittake>


>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 



-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/
------------------------------------------------
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

[drago01]

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
>  On 02/05/2013 07:42 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 07:19 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>
> >> On 02/05/2013 05:51 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>> , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine
> >>>> doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their
> >>>> download).
> >>>> Their download button actually points to a selector, not directly to an
> >>>> ISO.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
> >>> when Ubuntu showed up, then?
> >>
> >>
> >> Is the situation Fedora is in essentially better? I feel no.
> >>
> >> Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having
> >> difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
> "Ubuntu is
> >> much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too
> unstable", "Way too
> >> short life-cycles" are the usual answers.
> >
> >
> > Let's not go down that path. It's far off topic.
>
>  I disagree. Fedora's lack of popularity is largely thanks to these issues. 
No the desktop choice isn't the issue (it wasn't any more popular in
the GNOME2 days).

For the "new users":

There is no easy way to install applications (regular user don't want
to mess up with packages).
We do not ship stuff that some user want to use (by design or for
legal reasons).

For the "advanced users" the desktop choice matters even less because
they know how to chose a desktop.

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 08:45 AM, drago01 wrote:
>  On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 7:55 AM, Ralf Corsepius
> <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
> > On 02/05/2013 07:42 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 07:19 +0100, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 02/05/2013 05:51 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>> , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine
> >>>>> doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their
> >>>>> download).
> >>>>> Their download button actually points to a selector, not directly to
> an
> >>>>> ISO.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
> >>>> when Ubuntu showed up, then?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Is the situation Fedora is in essentially better? I feel no.
> >>>
> >>> Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having
> >>> difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds'
> distro", "Ubuntu is
> >>> much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too
> unstable", "Way too
> >>> short life-cycles" are the usual answers.
> >>
> >>
> >> Let's not go down that path. It's far off topic.
> >
> > I disagree. Fedora's lack of popularity is largely thanks to these issues.
>
>  No the desktop choice isn't the issue (it wasn't any more popular in
>  the GNOME2 days). 
In the Gnome2 days you had choices between functionally similar DEs.

Times have changed ... Gnome has been forked multiply (Gnome3, MATE, 
Cinammon), xfce/enlightenment are back.

Why? IMO, due to user dissatisfaction with what primarily Fedora and 
Ubuntu ship as default DEs, rsp. because Gnome has dropped their former 
userbase.

>  For the "advanced users" the desktop choice matters even
> less because
>  they know how to chose a desktop. 
To "advanced users" anaconda enforcing GNOME is defect ;)

Ralf

[Luya Tshimbalanga]

On 05/02/13 12:09 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  In the Gnome2 days you had choices between functionally similar DEs.
>
>  Times have changed ... Gnome has been forked multiply (Gnome3, MATE, 
>  Cinammon), xfce/enlightenment are back.
>  
Gnome 3 is still Gnome. Both MATE and Cinnamon which came years after 
Gnome 3 via Gnome-Shell, are reactionary for self-interest because these 
DE can easily reproduced through Gnome-Shell extensions meaning they 
will become irrelevant in a future.

Luya

[Reindl Harald]

Am 05.02.2013 22:21, schrieb Luya Tshimbalanga:
>  On 05/02/13 12:09 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >
> > In the Gnome2 days you had choices between functionally similar DEs.
> >
> > Times have changed ... Gnome has been forked multiply (Gnome3, MATE, Cinammon),
> xfce/enlightenment are back.
> >
>  Gnome 3 is still Gnome. Both MATE and Cinnamon which came years after Gnome 3 via
> Gnome-Shell, are reactionary for
>  self-interest because these DE can easily reproduced through Gnome-Shell extensions
> meaning they will become
>  irrelevant in a future 
and if the developers (in this case GNOME developers) would
be less ignorant while punish their users they would never
became relevent because there would have been no reason to fork

>  because these DE can easily reproduced through Gnome-Shell extensions
and why the hell did upstream not do this work from the
very frist beginning?

my definition of REwrite and optimize is

* clean up the code base
* provide the same functionality as before
* fix bugs
* release

[Pavel Simerda]

----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Reindl Harald" <h.reindl(a)thelounge.net&gt;
>  Am 05.02.2013 22:21, schrieb Luya Tshimbalanga:
>  > On 05/02/13 12:09 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  > Gnome 3 is still Gnome. Both MATE and Cinnamon which came years
>  > after Gnome 3 via Gnome-Shell, are reactionary for
>  > self-interest because these DE can easily reproduced through
>  > Gnome-Shell extensions meaning they will become
>  > irrelevant in a future
>  
>  and if the developers (in this case GNOME developers) would
>  be less ignorant while punish their users they would never
>  became relevent because there would have been no reason to fork 
I couldn't agree more. I can hardly imagine how an open project can be so careless
about such large groups of their own users.

>  > because these DE can easily reproduced through Gnome-Shell
>  > extensions
>  
>  and why the hell did upstream not do this work from the very frist beginning? 
I wouldn't ask specific people to actually work on it. But it would be nice if the
core developers provided more support, feature stability and API stability. To ask them to
actively encourage alternative GUIs and allow them to be built on top of the Gnome stack
instead of forking some of its projects... would be probably too much.

If only it could be possible to make most of the Gnome devs learn from the community
feedback instead of giving marvellous talks at conferences about how much the community is
wrong.

Cheers,

Pavel

[Olav Vitters]

On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 11:13:48AM -0500, Pavel Simerda wrote:
>  I wouldn't ask specific people to actually work on it. But it
> would be
>  nice if the core developers provided more support, feature stability
>  and API stability. To ask them to actively encourage alternative GUIs
>  and allow them to be built on top of the Gnome stack instead of
>  forking some of its projects... would be probably too much. 
We specifically allowed gnome-panel and the entire fallback mode to be
forked / taken over once we received request for that. See the blogpost
from Vincent Untz and the release email announcements for details. Also,
gnome-main-menu is under the maintainership (@ git.gnome.org) of the
MATE developers.

>  If only it could be possible to make most of the Gnome devs learn
> from
>  the community feedback instead of giving marvellous talks at
>  conferences about how much the community is wrong. 
Seems you did not attend the talk. Suggest actually watching the video.


Apologies for adding some facts to this discussion :P

-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Ben Rosser]

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga <luya(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;wrote:

>  On 05/02/13 12:09 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>
> >
> > In the Gnome2 days you had choices between functionally similar DEs.
> >
> > Times have changed ... Gnome has been forked multiply (Gnome3, MATE,
> > Cinammon), xfce/enlightenment are back.
> >
> >  Gnome 3 is still Gnome. Both MATE and Cinnamon which came years after
>  Gnome 3 via Gnome-Shell, are reactionary for self-interest because these DE
>  can easily reproduced through Gnome-Shell extensions meaning they will
>  become irrelevant in a future.
>
>  Luya 

While I agree that Gnome 3 is still Gnome... it is still Gnome in the sense
that Windows 8 is still just the new version of Windows.

Also, "years after"? I first read about MATE on the Arch forums back in
2011, a few months after the final release of Gnome 3 (which was in April
2011): https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=121162 Likewise, the
first post about Cinnamon on the Linux Mint website I can find was in
December 2011. Unless you were referring to the Gnome 3 development cycle,
I suppose.

For the record, I'm pretty sure replacing Gnome 3 with Cinnamon isn't the
best idea. (I think if we change the default at all it should probably be
to KDE instead, but that's just me). However, let's not pretend Gnome 3 (or
"Gnome 3 with Gnome Shell") isn't a very different desktop environment from
its predecessor, even though "it is still Gnome".

Ben

[Grigory Shipunov]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/02/13 11:45, drago01 wrote:

>  For the "new users":
>  
>  There is no easy way to install applications (regular user don't
>  want to mess up with packages). We do not ship stuff that some user
>  want to use (by design or for legal reasons).
>  
>  For the "advanced users" the desktop choice matters even less
>  because they know how to chose a desktop.
>   
That is very true. In my opinion there's no reason to change default
or omit this concept. Fedora is _not_ distro for linux newcomers. If
one wants to make fedora more friendly to newbie users, one should
make it way more stable(It not fedora way), start to ship non-free
media codecs(same here) and so on. That's why I think that all
"cinnamon is friendly to newcomers" reasons are not true for fedora,
because fedora itself not friendly to newcomers. And advanced user(as
drago01 says) usually knows what he wants, and he able to click on
"more download options" link.

- --
Grigory
excuse my poor english
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJREMCuAAoJEB2Utztg3NGsFRwP/jiz2pD6eC6HntWylaaN3ZEB
> x9sfujHsNSGJfmY89DK7VF2Y/PpFxbkEURYjdiKyvwIaSDhxUhIiNwXrZCUntQYF
> V6XfQzjnpX7KWAk1uvgxNKvBOlx2NizuV2Fng3y15Zq5ps0qQ4Dx8fluV4XqSAz6
> 7qSGfK6BIdG+Rq9iI8p12fJDaMbZKduitJIqUV/heAdYMJV5kAFQkuF4eMlJF2Sb
> 2xwL8BHNvtH0xsvqjM9mes9qqLtVNTaaxWrwsZt4Kp9TGgNN3oineNa3g0drEeJb
> XHpk0q6yXCqr7s6C+KyLIeB0fUKaE9o0xwYLDVGKXnU2BV7AtuzYxnzb9jeY30PZ
> oAHVRANaX+bPKw4UApFhLDiIsmULo7vBUlooRCdR1NM3VRrj7XAMzgfvt/7ss/ma
> rPYldejcHav7/ohAAusKcS2+0ESsoeQqCDTZpSZH4au2trAqFUkzeRfL9nmgO2LM
> WbNrNgFgCr0Gjr96Q0oVBm+nv5HODYdvqwkoQ1Qqs17VGFwStmkiPal5tuXXn5vH
> EWqfljO20pu0AgO4zwD5UDkWYBBjXF9N17M2rZabZBU6mDUgl7hl13DgUKTo86XQ
> jvfBX1hscAB9qeZcAmy9aM4kdmo+yIaYC3ltcg95l1Kh0aMq/BKYY+B0O1ZuQgUx
> cst88y+pfva8uzoTPhvY
> =zvJZ
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Kevin Kofler]

drago01 wrote:
>  There is no easy way to install applications (regular user don't
> want
>  to mess up with packages). 
Huh? Fire up gnome-packagekit or Apper, choose your app, make 2 or 3 clicks 
(install, apply, confirm dependencies if any), enter your root password and 
the app is there. How do you propose making this any easier?

I don't understand all this app store hype. Our repository system gives you 
the same advantages while being much sounder technically (automatic 
dependency resolution instead of bundling everything).

        Kevin Kofler

[Olav Vitters]

On Sat, Feb 09, 2013 at 10:22:41AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  drago01 wrote:
>  > There is no easy way to install applications (regular user don't want
>  > to mess up with packages).
>  
>  Huh? Fire up gnome-packagekit or Apper, choose your app, make 2 or 3 clicks 
>  (install, apply, confirm dependencies if any), enter your root password and 
>  the app is there. How do you propose making this any easier?
>  
>  I don't understand all this app store hype. Our repository system gives you 
>  the same advantages while being much sounder technically (automatic 
>  dependency resolution instead of bundling everything). 
It is providing a solution from the maintainer perspective. Ideally
everything should be packaged by a distribution. But sometimes it is
nice to have a stable distribution, bit still easily be able to test a
development version of some app and see if your bug has been fixed. Same
for the maintainer who just wants to provide something for loads of
distributions, not wait if someone makes a package for every
distribution out there.

A distribution does not scale as much as all individual maintainers can
IMO. That said, distribution is still preferred (drawbacks of the
solution like shipping your own libraries is ugly).
-- 
Regards,
Olav

[Matej Cepl]

On 2013-02-05, 06:19 GMT, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having 
>  difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
> "Ubuntu 
>  is much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too unstable",
> "Way 
>  too short life-cycles" are the usual answers. 
Good people walk balanced step towards the goal. Others, without 
knowing, dance around them contemporary dances. (Franz Kafka)

I wouldn't be worried that Fedora is not cool. Actually, thinking about 
it, that's the best part of Fedora.

Best,

Matěj

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 02/05/2013 10:06 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
>  On 2013-02-05, 06:19 GMT, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having
> > difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
> "Ubuntu
> > is much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too
> unstable", "Way
> > too short life-cycles" are the usual answers.
>
>  Good people walk balanced step towards the goal. Others, without
>  knowing, dance around them contemporary dances. (Franz Kafka)
>
>  I wouldn't be worried that Fedora is not cool. Actually, thinking about
>  it, that's the best part of Fedora. 
Absolutely d'accord ... But why have this "kool default DE" and not 
leave the choice to what its users actually use?

Or differently: One of Fedora's "higher" goal is "freedom" - Why
not 
demonstrate this attitude by example and decouple Fedora from Gnome?

Ralf

[Kévin Raymond]

>  >
>  >Good people walk balanced step towards the goal. Others, without
>  >knowing, dance around them contemporary dances. (Franz Kafka)
>  >
>  >I wouldn't be worried that Fedora is not cool. Actually, thinking about
>  >it, that's the best part of Fedora.
>  
>  Absolutely d'accord ... But why have this "kool default DE" and not
>  leave the choice to what its users actually use?
>  
>  Or differently: One of Fedora's "higher" goal is "freedom" - Why
> not
>  demonstrate this attitude by example and decouple Fedora from Gnome?
>   
Hey, it's "GNOME" and not "Gnome" ;)

If we start shipping DE choice on the ISO, it will make them heavier. And we
will always have to pre-select the available DE. We simply can't include them
all. Some won't have enough test. Some won't be as integrated as others. Some
won't be available or updated for the next release.
It is a really difficult choice.

But we can think about the most used DE (GNOME, KDE, Xfce, LXDE..?)
We already have a multidesktop DVD including an initial menu that let people
decide which DE to install by default.
We could probably advertise this one, or work on this to get it on the blockers?
I am not from QA, I don't have so much inputs from the release process for this
specific ISO, but I am sure that people like them.

Ok, we would still have GNOME by default on the DVD and the default live
download..

We can spread this topic in three parts:
- People install from the DVD
  We could probably advertize better the DE choice during Anaconda.
- People install from the default download ISO
  We can't include all DE on the media here, therefore we could be able to
  propose them an app or a start menu or something faster than PackageKit to let
  them easily change there DE.
- People are lost looking for the ISO that they want
  Then they should just install the default one and keep rocking. Or we need to
  improve our websites. Or we should graph a dowload workflow where everyone
  would be represented (simple users, experienced users, sysadmins...)

Hey folks, we have spins.fedoraproject.org for all that does not want the default
GNOME DE.
Can you please take one minute to check this website, and report me which spin
as an up to date content?
Most of this website is outdated (not the dowload links of course). The content
was created once. The screeshots was taken onces. The package listed on the
yum groups is probably outdated.
Do the websites team has to handle this? My reply is no. If you think so, join
us.
I have sent to the spin mailing list a request for new screenshot and fresh
content for several releases now (not for F18). Only got one or two answers.

What is important is not to propose something incredible once. We want to
provide quality. Everytime. We should maintain our softwares. Same for our
communication. Same for our websites. Same for our Fedora.

We are not seeking GNU/Linux users. We are seeking for contributors. If they
don't take the time to change their DE and just leave Fedora because we have
GNOME by default, do we really care? (Yeah, I do. A bit.)
But I agree, I don't like configuring things every time, I would not like to
have to install KDE and remove GNOME every time if I were a KDE lover.
But we have kickstart install. We already have spins.

We should probably just change the way we advertise them.

-- 
Kévin Raymond
(Shaiton)

[drago01]

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:27 AM, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt; wrote:
>  On 02/05/2013 10:06 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
> >
> > On 2013-02-05, 06:19 GMT, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> >>
> >> Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having
> >> difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
> "Ubuntu
> >> is much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too
> unstable", "Way
> >> too short life-cycles" are the usual answers.
> >
> >
> > Good people walk balanced step towards the goal. Others, without
> > knowing, dance around them contemporary dances. (Franz Kafka)
> >
> > I wouldn't be worried that Fedora is not cool. Actually, thinking about
> > it, that's the best part of Fedora.
>
>
>  Absolutely d'accord ... But why have this "kool default DE" and not leave
>  the choice to what its users actually use?
>
>  Or differently: One of Fedora's "higher" goal is "freedom" - Why
> not
>  demonstrate this attitude by example and decouple Fedora from Gnome? 
Freedom != Choice dialogs for everything.
Our users have the freedom to install whatever desktop they like.  And
where do you draw the line? Select browser? Select texteditor? Select
calculator? Select .... ?
Most users don't give a shit about this they just want to install and
be done with it. Those who want to select something different have the
freedom to do so.

[Aleksandar Kurtakov]

----- Original Message -----
>  From: "Ralf Corsepius" <rc040203(a)freenet.de&gt;
>  To: devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  Sent: Tuesday, February 5, 2013 12:27:35 PM
>  Subject: Re: Proposed F19 Feature: Cinnamon as Default Desktop
>  
>  On 02/05/2013 10:06 AM, Matej Cepl wrote:
>  > On 2013-02-05, 06:19 GMT, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  >> Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having
>  >> difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
>  >> "Ubuntu
>  >> is much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too
> unstable",
>  >> "Way
>  >> too short life-cycles" are the usual answers.
>  >
>  > Good people walk balanced step towards the goal. Others, without
>  > knowing, dance around them contemporary dances. (Franz Kafka)
>  >
>  > I wouldn't be worried that Fedora is not cool. Actually, thinking
>  > about
>  > it, that's the best part of Fedora.
>  
>  Absolutely d'accord ... But why have this "kool default DE" and not
>  leave the choice to what its users actually use?
>  
>  Or differently: One of Fedora's "higher" goal is "freedom" - Why
> not
>  demonstrate this attitude by example and decouple Fedora from Gnome?
>   
Is this a technical coupling you speak about or just because of the download button? I
mean Fedora being coupled to Gnome for me means that if I install from the KDE spin
I'll get a full blown Gnome installation too.

Alexander Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse team

>  Ralf
>  
>  
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[Grigory Shipunov]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/02/13 10:19, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  On 02/05/2013 05:51 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>  
> >> , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine doing
> >> exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their 
> >> download). Their download button actually points to a selector,
> >> not directly to an ISO.
> > 
> > That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely
> > panned when Ubuntu showed up, then?
>  
>  Is the situation Fedora is in essentially better? I feel no.
>  
>  Reality is, when mentioning Fedora to Linux users, I am having 
>  difficulties to not get laughed at. "Freaks'/nerds' distro",
>  "Ubuntu is much easier", "Fedora lacks soooo much", "Way too
>  unstable", "Way too short life-cycles" are the usual answers.
>   
Try to look from different point of view: This is true for newcomers.
Ubuntu is really easier for new users. Fedora is really unstable and
lacks some software for new users. Cinnamon(or selector instead of
direct link) won't fix it.

> > To the point where they've since been sold two times and
> have
> > never really recovered.
>  Yes, primarily because they did not make enough money to satisfy
>  their shareholders. Nevertheless, at least in Germany (SUSE had
>  never played a major role outside of Germany), openSUSE seem to
>  have a pretty stable and solid user base.
>  
>  Ralf
>  
>   
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRENJBAAoJEB2Utztg3NGsP8AP/iqgZzDYYa9k5McLp1D03ZRT
> 3gLQnCtYTA6BSKu14tf/7Sgi0G7F88uYnwOATQ9xQVNwy1ha7jdylsX2cq8+9xZT
> eyLUgM6LIU24SLNmuhOg/UjiRLJL6Jrfic86SIsgbJpzkisqZhdIvejhh7tswFi2
> 7B0Xox8HZDnpy+bQDktWnpjjy65h0xxMa2PdRG5taP+JCEio39ZLn3sUgx/Njw8I
> R8ATXTkNxUkY4qzSoH/HbpEwIa1QZjuU9HdaMiTUQMvt5kT8w4mckdS0jK3GSbh2
> fCqLeVg19BrYUDKo0mI3jKXGG42rpbiTn/d5gNMUA8JINDSq/j9tbrh/7mfNP3mA
> czTLr1jXQF7QKFpb2nArq+Eqc3CYQJWF4d6uVgG+A2KvmeWAHmpzGw0PEmBmX5uZ
> kj1TzR1HvEp4PYQTtJdJ4XouGzvoGU5Epk+meKq7x0AOsF4Ju8O6/Ce0Viexx5LW
> L7TVSs35TPA4TmvideMtN5PvqOgrLAcbgSCiTb8rqz3B46pJA2klSiLR8LgqExzk
> SmWuOou2olEWPa8n3MB5k/3LjXjRhNhIOqzGcDDXazLLdLlGa5m05np+19VaZK1Y
> N46UyiKdzetrXen4rEL5gihyYxMdBiHU7e4+M71lJA3TGJ03ylq1wIPr77IEM73d
> pdDwcFNB837DfZNPwb8p
> =ZfUd
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Michael Schroeder]

On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 08:51:47PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely
> panned
>  when Ubuntu showed up, then? 
The last numbers I had showed that the openSUSE user base is about the
same size as the Fedora user base. (That was about two years ago,
though, I don't know if Fedora made a giant leap in the meantime.)

>  To the point where they've since been sold
>  two times and have never really recovered. 
Please don't claim things you don't know anything about.

Cheers,
  Michael.

-- 
Michael Schroeder                                   mls(a)suse.de
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH,  GF Jeff Hawn, HRB 16746 AG Nuernberg
main(_){while(_=~getchar())putchar(~_-1/(~(_|32)/13*2-11)*13);}

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 11:18 +0100, Michael Schroeder wrote:
>  On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 08:51:47PM -0800, Adam Williamson wrote:
>  > That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
>  > when Ubuntu showed up, then?
>  
>  The last numbers I had showed that the openSUSE user base is about the
>  same size as the Fedora user base. (That was about two years ago,
>  though, I don't know if Fedora made a giant leap in the meantime.)
>  
>  > To the point where they've since been sold
>  > two times and have never really recovered.
>  
>  Please don't claim things you don't know anything about. 
Sorry, that came off as excessively harsh, I didn't intend it that way -
just that SUSE hasn't achieved some extraordinary level of success or
anything, to make it a model.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Kevin Kofler]

Adam Williamson wrote:

>  On Tue, 2013-02-05 at 02:59 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > , but since you started it: OpenSUSE is doing just fine
> > doing exactly what I suggest (making people actually pick their
> > download). Their download button actually points to a selector, not
> > directly to an ISO.
>  
>  That would be the SUSE that along with Mandriva got completely panned
>  when Ubuntu showed up, then? To the point where they've since been sold
>  two times and have never really recovered. 
That was BEFORE OpenSUSE and thus BEFORE the selector was introduced. Back 
then, the default in SuSE was KDE and only KDE. Then Novell came and started 
pushing GNOME. And only then came OpenSUSE.

        Kevin Kofler

[Martin Sourada]

On Mon, 04 Feb 2013 15:53:20 -0800 
Adam Williamson wrote:
>  You're a new Linux user, you go to our download page, and instead
> of a
>  simple big green Download button, it starts asking you questions about
>  what 'desktop environment' you want? What the hell is this crap? 
Well, than
with the current model you either:
 * download an ISO that fails to boot, because you still have a 32bit
   machine -> never think about Fedora again.
 * See gnome shell, something totally different to what you've ever
   used -> what the hell is this crap? Walk away.
 * If you happen to like (Yay, it looks like my Android phone!) it
   you'll get greeted by installed with grey icons -> wait what? Is
   that actually for a computer with a colour display? Is that thing
   modern? I don't want to use oldish stuff. Walk away.
 * And if you still persist, you get greeted with an installer that's
   completely different to anything you've ever used. Where the hell is
   the "next" button? Have I forgot anything? I'm not feeling safe
   installing this. Walk away.

If you want to target this kind of users, you need to provide them with
similar-to-Windows experience -- or have a really strong marketing,
like Ubuntu does, to make users feel it's cool to use something they
don't know/like at first -- if you don't want them to quit instantly.
First impression does a lot and gnome shell isn't especially good with
*first* impressions.

I think the no-single-default DE is better. Let's say I think it's
better to go with more "defaults" -- i.e. the initial choice would be
of DEs that are known to be well maintained and supported in Fedora.
That's GNOME and KDE at the very least. The app defaults are then up to
the various desktops' teams -> they would want to make their desktop
appeal to users if they cannot count on being downloaded directly from
homepage, right? And lets hope (WRT the bottom couple of points above)
that anacoda UI gets better in F20 (I generally agree with the reasons
why was anaconda finally rewritten).

Martin

[Mathieu Bridon]

On Wed, 2013-02-06 at 09:42 +0100, Martin Sourada wrote:
>  First impression does a lot and gnome shell isn't especially good
> with
>  *first* impressions. 
In my experience, it is actually brilliant for first impressions.

I recently upgraded my parents' computer from Fedora 16 with GNOME
Fallback to Fedora 18 with GNOME Shell.

I had to explain quickly to my mum (a basic computer user), where her
stuff was, and her first words were (about the overview) "I like this,
it's much easier to know where my windows are" (she never understood the
concept of the taskbar, she always thought her windows were disappearing
and kept opening more)

For my dad (even less skilled than my mum), I rushed to the computer
yelling "waaaaait! I have to explain the new things to you!!!" and found
him already doing his stuff. When I asked, he said "Oh, I guessed
'activities' was for doing stuff, so I went there and found the orange
icon to go to the Internet".

Both found it easier to use than GNOME 2 or GNOME 3 Fallback. Both liked
it much better, from the first time they tried it.

Granted, it's purely anecdata and they probably aren't the Fedora target
user.

But your statement was even less backed by data. ;)


-- 
Mathieu

[Martin Sourada]

On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 16:58:22 +0800 
Mathieu Bridon wrote:
>  But your statement was even less backed by data. ;)
>   
I was assuming the case of newcomers doing the switch "by themselves",
coming from Windows (supposedly pre Win8), in rare cases from Mac OS X.
My data is generally known -- just look over the internet, or even usage
statistics (yeah I know they're far from exact). The introduction of
gnome shell and ubuntu unity is the reason why cinnamon and mate exist
and why XFCE regained popularity. Sure, some people later switched back
to GS or UU, but that no longer counts as *first* impressions. Even many
of the GS promoters are defending it with words like "after using it a
bit you'll start to really like it". That's not *first* impression.

Your Mum and Dad are in a different situation -- you "forced"
them to use GS, they've been put in a different kind of situation than
newcomer that decided to try Fedora by himself.

But yeah, I'm *not* claiming I'm correct. These are my impressions and
opinions only ;-)

Martin

[Marcela Mašláňová]

On 01/27/2013 03:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>
>  Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
>
>  This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop interface from
>  Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is more
>  familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell interface,
>  while being built from Gnome 3 components.
>
>  == Detailed description ==
>  The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional desktop
>  interfaces on both Linux and Windows. While it is good that there is research
>  into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a traditional
>  interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or
>  impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome Shell vs. a
>  more traditional interface. I'm not trying to start (or continue) a flame war
>  here, so I won't state any of my own criticisms of Gnome Shell here, but I
>  will observe that a number of very high profile people in the Linux community,
>  such as Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox, have publicly announce that due to
>  problems with Gnome Shell they are switching to a different desktop and/or
>  Linux distribution.
>
>  I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new Fedora
>  install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome Shell if
>  they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a traditional
>  desktop.
>
>  The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based on the
>  latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate for a
>  default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel-announce mailing list
>  devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce
>  
Eric,
do you have support of all teams, which will work with you? Design, QA, 
docs, releng to create spin, ...? It's not only about popularity of DE, 
but also about future support of Cinnamon in Fedora.

I'm personally not interested in any gnome fork, so I'm interested only 
in stability of the default.

Marcela

[Dan Mashal]

On Tuesday, January 29, 2013, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:

>  On 01/27/2013 03:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>
> > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
> >
> https://fedoraproject.org/**wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_**Default_Desktop&l...
> >
> > Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
> >
> > This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop interface
> > from
> > Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is more
> > familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell
> > interface,
> > while being built from Gnome 3 components.
> >
> > == Detailed description ==
> > The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the traditional
> > desktop
> > interfaces on both Linux and Windows. While it is good that there is
> > research
> > into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a traditional
> > interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is difficult or
> > impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers Gnome Shell
> > vs. a
> > more traditional interface. I'm not trying to start (or continue) a flame
> > war
> > here, so I won't state any of my own criticisms of Gnome Shell here, but I
> > will observe that a number of very high profile people in the Linux
> > community,
> > such as Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox, have publicly announce that due to
> > problems with Gnome Shell they are switching to a different desktop and/or
> > Linux distribution.
> >
> > I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a new Fedora
> > install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the Gnome
> > Shell if
> > they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
> > traditional
> > desktop.
> >
> > The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being based on
> > the
> > latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better candidate for a
> > default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
> > ______________________________**_________________
> > devel-announce mailing list
> > devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >
> https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/devel-**announce<ht...
> >
> >  Eric,
>  do you have support of all teams, which will work with you? Design, QA,
>  docs, releng to create spin, ...? It's not only about popularity of DE, but
>  also about future support of Cinnamon in Fedora.
>
>  I'm personally not interested in any gnome fork, so I'm interested only in
>  stability of the default.
>
>  Marcela
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>
> https://admin.fedoraproject.**org/mailman/listinfo/devel<https://admin...


I'm sure QA, releng, docs, etc will go with what the community decides.

Lets have a poll. A very public one.

On the main website. Not somebody's blog. And let's let the users decide
what they want.

I'll tell you what, last time I checked #1 spin is KDE.

Dan

[Marcela Mašláňová]

On 01/29/2013 01:25 PM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  On Tuesday, January 29, 2013, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
>
>      On 01/27/2013 03:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>
>          = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>          https://fedoraproject.org/__wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as___Default_Desktop
>          <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop>
>
>          Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
>
>          This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop
>          interface from
>          Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that
>          is more
>          familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome
>          Shell interface,
>          while being built from Gnome 3 components.
>
>          == Detailed description ==
>          The Gnome 3 interface is substantially different that the
>          traditional desktop
>          interfaces on both Linux and Windows. While it is good that
>          there is research
>          into new user interface concepts, many users prefer to have a
>          traditional
>          interface that they are accustomed to. Unfortunately it is
>          difficult or
>          impossible to assess what fraction of the user base prefers
>          Gnome Shell vs. a
>          more traditional interface. I'm not trying to start (or
>          continue) a flame war
>          here, so I won't state any of my own criticisms of Gnome Shell
>          here, but I
>          will observe that a number of very high profile people in the
>          Linux community,
>          such as Linus Torvalds and Alan Cox, have publicly announce that
>          due to
>          problems with Gnome Shell they are switching to a different
>          desktop and/or
>          Linux distribution.
>
>          I submit the proposition that it is easier for a user doing a
>          new Fedora
>          install to start with a traditional desktop, and switch to the
>          Gnome Shell if
>          they prefer that, than to start with Gnome Shell and switch to a
>          traditional
>          desktop.
>
>          The Cinnamon desktop provides a traditional desktop while being
>          based on the
>          latest Gnome and GTK components, so it seems like a better
>          candidate for a
>          default desktop than MATE, which is based on older components.
>          _________________________________________________
>          devel-announce mailing list
>          devel-announce(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>          https://admin.fedoraproject.__org/mailman/listinfo/devel-__announce
>          <https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel-announce>
>
>      Eric,
>      do you have support of all teams, which will work with you? Design,
>      QA, docs, releng to create spin, ...? It's not only about popularity
>      of DE, but also about future support of Cinnamon in Fedora.
>
>      I'm personally not interested in any gnome fork, so I'm interested
>      only in stability of the default.
>
>      Marcela
>      --
>      devel mailing list
>      devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>      https://admin.fedoraproject.__org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>      <https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel>
>
>
>
>  I'm sure QA, releng, docs, etc will go with what the community decides.
>
>  Lets have a poll. A very public one.
>
>  On the main website. Not somebody's blog. And let's let the users decide
>  what they want.
>
>  I'll tell you what, last time I checked #1 spin is KDE.
>
>  Dan
>
>  
Dan, voting about DE of choice is one thing. Doing the work is 
something different. I was waiting for reply from the one who wants to 
work on the change, not from you ;-)

Marcela

[Mathieu Bridon]

On 01/29/2013 08:25 PM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  I'm sure QA, releng, docs, etc will go with what the community
> decides. 
Why would they?

They are community too, they don't have to "follow" on what other 
decide, they are free to go on working on the QA and docs of GNOME if 
they prefer, just like you were free to package MATE instead of GNOME.


-- 
Mathieu

[Dan Mashal]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Mathieu Bridon
<bochecha(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  On 01/29/2013 08:25 PM, Dan Mashal wrote:
> >
> > I'm sure QA, releng, docs, etc will go with what the community decides.
>
>
>  Why would they?
>
>  They are community too, they don't have to "follow" on what other decide,
>  they are free to go on working on the QA and docs of GNOME if they prefer,
>  just like you were free to package MATE instead of GNOME.
>
>
>  --
>  Mathieu
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
Well, I guess it just goes back to the subtle point I was making
earlier of exactly how much of a "community" based distro Fedora
REALLY is. I guess it's a little less subtle now.

Dan

[Jon Ciesla]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 7:09 AM, Dan Mashal <dan.mashal(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Mathieu Bridon
>  <bochecha(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  > On 01/29/2013 08:25 PM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  >>
>  >> I'm sure QA, releng, docs, etc will go with what the community decides.
>  >
>  >
>  > Why would they?
>  >
>  > They are community too, they don't have to "follow" on what other
> decide,
>  > they are free to go on working on the QA and docs of GNOME if they
>  prefer,
>  > just like you were free to package MATE instead of GNOME.
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > Mathieu
>  >
>  > --
>  > devel mailing list
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>  Well, I guess it just goes back to the subtle point I was making
>  earlier of exactly how much of a "community" based distro Fedora
>  REALLY is. I guess it's a little less subtle now.
>  
Almost homeopathically so, I'm afraid.  I'm missing where Fedora isn't a
community distro.  I see the Secret Red Hat Cabal canard a lot, and have
yet to see any evidence of it.  I myself am a great example.  I am not now,
nor have I ever been, a Red Hat employee.  Still, over the last several
year, I have managed to join the community, participate in discussions and
decsions, fix bugs, get packages in, and even serve a term in FESCO.  Then
I was voted out, because other individuals more qualified and popular than
myself got more votes from the community than I did.  ERMAHGERD TEH SHADOWY
REDHAT CONSPIRACY.

Seriously, relax.  Yes, there is Red Hat influence on Fedora.  You know
why?  It's because lots of Red Hat employees contribute, and Fedora evolved
from Red Hat Linux.  They bring great heaps of valuable contributions of
code, time, resources and expertise, both as part of Red Hat and as
individual members of the community.  Their influence is overt and
positive, not covert and malignant.  You may not agree with every choice
they make, but that's life.

I get that you're angry that a DE you don't like is the default and your DE
of choice isn't.  But tossing out unfounded accusations and personal
attacks on the -devel list isn't going to win you hearts and minds.  Making
the spin that uses your chosen DE the most popular and bug-free probably
would, over time.  People tend to use what works well for them, which is
why most of us are here, working on and using Fedora.  It's why Fedora
supports heaps of DEs in the first place.  We've seen it with GNOME, KDE,
XFCE (Open|Libre)Office, X11R6/Xorg, systemd, NetworkManager, distributed
SCM, and the list goes on.  If things really bring great value to users,
they will absolutely catch fire, working their way into prominent places
organically.  Some things never dominate their niche, but still fill a
definite need.  If a default setting is important enough to enough people,
they will vote for (or become) the candidates for the bodies that vote to
change it.  It can take time, lobbying, etc.  If that isn't working for you
personally, you can always fork, and build your own distro with whatever
defaults you like, and even be free from Red Hat influence*.  But I think
we're all better off if we, as a community, can remain civil, work
together, and continue to benefit from each other's work.  There's room for
everyone's contributions, but we have to play nicely together.

Kum ba ya  my lord, kum ba yaaa. . . . .

-J

 Dan
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 


*Except for the kernel, anaconda, NetworkManager, and a host of other
components.  But you can replace those if you like.

-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/
------------------------------------------------
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

[Jiri Eischmann]

Dan Mashal píše v Út 29. 01. 2013 v 04:25 -0800:
>  I'll tell you what, last time I checked #1 spin is KDE. 
1. because the Desktop "spin" is not included in the counter.
2. I doubt those numbers are accurate. Only 54 downloads of Xfce spin
for this release? I hope you understand it's completely out of the
reality since there have been over 200,000 direct downloads of F18. I
think those numbers have been in question several times. Someone even
suggested we'd remove them.

Polls are not a good way to find out what the majority wants. Because
the subset of users that usually participate in such polls don't
represent the whole user base. It's just not a statistically
representative sample.

BTW I've got slightly different stats:
http://eischmann.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/what-desktop-environments-are-c...
It may not be a 100% accurate, but it's based on a survey with over 4000
submitted results, so it has some relevance.

And please stop all that talk about excluding RHT employees from any
decisions. I think we're all equal and one big community. I spend a lot
of my free time working for Fedora and this really offends me.

Jiri

[Dan Mashal]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:12 AM, Jiri Eischmann <eischmann(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Dan Mashal píše v Út 29. 01. 2013 v 04:25 -0800:
> > I'll tell you what, last time I checked #1 spin is KDE.
>
>  1. because the Desktop "spin" is not included in the counter.
>  2. I doubt those numbers are accurate. Only 54 downloads of Xfce spin
>  for this release? I hope you understand it's completely out of the
>  reality since there have been over 200,000 direct downloads of F18. I
>  think those numbers have been in question several times. Someone even
>  suggested we'd remove them.
>
>  Polls are not a good way to find out what the majority wants. Because
>  the subset of users that usually participate in such polls don't
>  represent the whole user base. It's just not a statistically
>  representative sample.
>
>  BTW I've got slightly different stats:
>
> http://eischmann.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/what-desktop-environments-are-c...
>  It may not be a 100% accurate, but it's based on a survey with over 4000
>  submitted results, so it has some relevance.
>
>  And please stop all that talk about excluding RHT employees from any
>  decisions. I think we're all equal and one big community. I spend a lot
>  of my free time working for Fedora and this really offends me.
>
>  Jiri
>
>
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
You think you're the only one that's been offended?

BTW your graphs do not include Sugar, MATE, Cinnamon, and others.

Yes. I would say they are way off.

And by poll I meant an actual vote on the main www.fedoraproject.org.

My intention was not to offend, but merely point out that there seems
to be a consensus that has been predicated by your co-workers.

Dan

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 05:17:20AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:12 AM, Jiri Eischmann
> <eischmann(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  > Dan Mashal píše v Út 29. 01. 2013 v 04:25 -0800:
>  >> I'll tell you what, last time I checked #1 spin is KDE.
>  >
>  > 1. because the Desktop "spin" is not included in the counter.
>  > 2. I doubt those numbers are accurate. Only 54 downloads of Xfce spin
>  > for this release? I hope you understand it's completely out of the
>  > reality since there have been over 200,000 direct downloads of F18. I
>  > think those numbers have been in question several times. Someone even
>  > suggested we'd remove them.
>  >
>  > Polls are not a good way to find out what the majority wants. Because
>  > the subset of users that usually participate in such polls don't
>  > represent the whole user base. It's just not a statistically
>  > representative sample.
>  >
>  > BTW I've got slightly different stats:
>  >
> http://eischmann.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/what-desktop-environments-are-c...
>  > It may not be a 100% accurate, but it's based on a survey with over 4000
>  > submitted results, so it has some relevance.
>  >
>  > And please stop all that talk about excluding RHT employees from any
>  > decisions. I think we're all equal and one big community. I spend a lot
>  > of my free time working for Fedora and this really offends me.
>  >
>  > Jiri
>  >
>  
>  You think you're the only one that's been offended?
>  
>  BTW your graphs do not include Sugar, MATE, Cinnamon, and others. 
Just for the record, below the first graph is written:
"GNOME 2 also includes GNOME 3 Fallback, MATE."

Pierre

[Miloslav Trmač]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Jiri Eischmann <eischmann(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Polls are not a good way to find out what the majority wants.
> Because
>  the subset of users that usually participate in such polls don't
>  represent the whole user base. It's just not a statistically
>  representative sample.
>
>  BTW I've got slightly different stats:
>
> http://eischmann.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/what-desktop-environments-are-c...
>  It may not be a 100% accurate, but it's based on a survey with over 4000
>  submitted results, so it has some relevance. 
If you want a more statistically representative sample, I hear there
is an office of about 500 mostly Linux users somewhere in Czech
Republic :)  Just go through all the floors and ask everyone to avoid
self-selection bias.  (The single-company bias is still there, but at
least that can't be accused of being anti-GNOME.)
    Mirek

[Eric Smith]

On 01/29/2013 05:25 AM, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  Lets have a poll. A very public one.
>
>  On the main website. Not somebody's blog. And let's let the users 
>  decide what they want.
>
>  I'll tell you what, last time I checked #1 spin is KDE.
>  
I like that idea.  It's ultimately up to FESCo to decide, but a poll 
would give them more information as a basis for the decision.

Eric

[Peter Jones]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:25:05AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  I'm sure QA, releng, docs, etc will go with what the community
> decides.
>  
>  Lets have a poll. A very public one.
>  
>  On the main website. Not somebody's blog. And let's let the users decide
>  what they want. 
Do we have any significant data that even a plurality of our *users* visit
our main website on a regular - or any - basis?

I have my doubts that all that many do, much less that we've got data that
tells us that such a poll would result in meaningful data.

-- 
        Peter

[Dan Mashal]

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Peter Jones <pjones(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:25:05AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
> > I'm sure QA, releng, docs, etc will go with what the community decides.
> >
> > Lets have a poll. A very public one.
> >
> > On the main website. Not somebody's blog. And let's let the users decide
> > what they want.
>
>  Do we have any significant data that even a plurality of our *users* visit
>  our main website on a regular - or any - basis?
>
>  I have my doubts that all that many do, much less that we've got data that
>  tells us that such a poll would result in meaningful data.
>
>  --
>          Peter
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 

Why would they when all they see is Gnome Gnome Gnome?

It's much easier to google "Fedora 18 DVD" or just go to
http://dl.fedoraproject.org

Dan

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Peter Jones <pjones(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 04:25:05AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
> > I'm sure QA, releng, docs, etc will go with what the community decides.
> >
> > Lets have a poll. A very public one.
> >
> > On the main website. Not somebody's blog. And let's let the users decide
> > what they want.
>
>  Do we have any significant data that even a plurality of our *users* visit
>  our main website on a regular - or any - basis?
>
>  I have my doubts that all that many do, much less that we've got data that
>  tells us that such a poll would result in meaningful data.
>
>  --
>          Peter
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
Do we have a team dedicated to goals and objectives for the website,
SEO, social media "marketing", analytics, key performance indicators,
marketing funnel, all that good stuff?

Fedora used to have Smolt and there are tools to figure out what
packages people use. There's no reason Fedora *can't* be data driven,
but there's a whole lot of "business" process stuff you'd need to
commit to for it to work without wasting precious energy and hours of
pointless arguments. ;-)

-- 
Twitter: http://twitter.com/znmeb; Computational Journalism on a Stick
http://j.mp/CompJournoStick/

The National Coal Institute reminds you, "There's no fuel like an old
fuel."

[Reindl Harald]

Am 03.02.2013 17:50, schrieb M. Edward (Ed) Borasky:
>  Fedora used to have Smolt and there are tools to figure out what
>  packages people use. There's no reason Fedora *can't* be data driven,
>  but there's a whole lot of "business" process stuff you'd need to
>  commit to for it to work without wasting precious energy and hours of
>  pointless arguments. ;-) 
data like from smolt are useless!

i maintain around 40 fedora-setups which are never touching
any fedora-machine because of internal repos and it is countless
how many machines are often installed with one ISO download

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:

>  data like from smolt are useless!
>
>  i maintain around 40 fedora-setups which are never touching
>  any fedora-machine because of internal repos and it is countless
>  how many machines are often installed with one ISO download
>  
Smolt profiles are not based on ISO downloads or repository connections, so
I am not sure why you bring these up

Rahul

[Reindl Harald]

Am 03.02.2013 19:18, schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
>  Hi
>  
>  On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>  
>      data like from smolt are useless!
>  
>      i maintain around 40 fedora-setups which are never touching
>      any fedora-machine because of internal repos and it is countless
>      how many machines are often installed with one ISO download
>  
>  
>  Smolt profiles are not based on ISO downloads or repository connections, so I am not sure
> why you bring these up 
to show that all this stats are useless?

98% of all machines i maintain are CLONES
virtual ones as also phyical ones

you believe someone starts smolt manually on a clone
to raise up any statistics? not really!

fact is you have NO NUMBERS at all for opensource
you only could have them with spyware - god beware

[Rahul Sundaram]

>  you believe someone starts smolt manually on a clone 
>  to raise up any statistics? not really!
>
>  fact is you have NO NUMBERS at all for opensource
>  
That is not true.  We have some numbers.  They are not 100% accurate and we
never claim it will be.  You are misleading users by talking about ISO
downloads when noone is counting those.

Rahul

[Pierre-Yves Chibon]

On Sun, 2013-02-03 at 17:53 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
>  
>  Am 03.02.2013 17:50, schrieb M. Edward (Ed) Borasky:
>  > Fedora used to have Smolt and there are tools to figure out what
>  > packages people use. There's no reason Fedora *can't* be data driven,
>  > but there's a whole lot of "business" process stuff you'd need to
>  > commit to for it to work without wasting precious energy and hours of
>  > pointless arguments. ;-)
>  
>  data like from smolt are useless! 
For you maybe, but I have had a discussion at the last FUDCon where
someone actually said it was useful to him.
Please avoid generalization.

Pierre

[Reindl Harald]

Am 03.02.2013 20:22, schrieb Pierre-Yves Chibon:
>  On Sun, 2013-02-03 at 17:53 +0100, Reindl Harald wrote:
> >
> > Am 03.02.2013 17:50, schrieb M. Edward (Ed) Borasky:
> >> Fedora used to have Smolt and there are tools to figure out what
> >> packages people use. There's no reason Fedora *can't* be data driven,
> >> but there's a whole lot of "business" process stuff you'd need
> to
> >> commit to for it to work without wasting precious energy and hours of
> >> pointless arguments. ;-)
> >
> > data like from smolt are useless!
>  
>  For you maybe, but I have had a discussion at the last FUDCon where
>  someone actually said it was useful to him.
>  Please avoid generalization. 
useful to count what?

you need users ACTIVELY use it
you need users ACTIVELY use it after dist-upgrades

the only thing smolt stats are showing is that someone
used something with no reference if he still use the
same after a year - these numbers does not prove anything

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:

>  useful to count what?
>
>  you need users ACTIVELY use it
>  you need users ACTIVELY use it after dist-upgrades
>  
This isn't  true.  There is a cron job that continues to keep the profile
updated


>  the only thing smolt stats are showing is that someone
>  used something with no reference if he still use the
>  same after a year - these numbers does not prove anything
>  
We aren't looking for proof or 100% reliable numbers as much as observing
some general trends because that's the best we can do without violating the
privacy of users.

Rahul

[Ralf Corsepius]

On 01/27/2013 03:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>
>  Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
>
>  This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop interface from
>  Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is more
>  familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell interface,
>  while being built from Gnome 3 components. 
Though I certainly would welcome Fedora to switch away from Gnome3 as 
default desktop, I do not see much sense in switching to Cinnamon, 
because Cinnamon is too similar to Gnome3.

Instead, I'd propose Fedora to switch away from having *any* default GUI 
and offer Fedora users an equal choice between all different major DE 
Fedora ships (e.g. Gnome3, Cinnamon, MATE, KDE. xfce ...).

Ralf

[Christopher Meng]

Funny...I suggest that we can submit a changing desktop feature per release.

Maybe this is the best solution.

[Frank Murphy]

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 21:56:17 +0800
Christopher Meng <cickumqt(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

>  Funny...I suggest that we can submit a changing desktop feature per
>  release.
>  
>  Maybe this is the best solution. 
No, it's not a Screensaver.

-- 
Regards,
Frank
http//www.frankly3d.com

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 29.1.2013 14:56, Christopher Meng napsal(a):
>  Funny...I suggest that we can submit a changing desktop feature per 
>  release.
>
>  Maybe this is the best solution.
>
>  
It might be nice extension to different wallpaper in every release ;)

Vít

[Michał Piotrowski]

2013/1/29 Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com&gt;:
>  Dne 29.1.2013 14:56, Christopher Meng napsal(a):
>
> >
> > Funny...I suggest that we can submit a changing desktop feature per
> > release.
> >
> > Maybe this is the best solution.
> >
> >
>
>  It might be nice extension to different wallpaper in every release ;) 
How about installing random desktop? This feature can be called
"surprise desktop" ;)

>  Vít
>
>
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 


-- 
Best regards,
Michal

http://eventhorizon.pl/
https://getactive.pl/

[Jon Ciesla]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4(a)gmail.com&gt;wrote:

>  2013/1/29 Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com&gt;:
>  > Dne 29.1.2013 14:56, Christopher Meng napsal(a):
>  >
>  >>
>  >> Funny...I suggest that we can submit a changing desktop feature per
>  >> release.
>  >>
>  >> Maybe this is the best solution.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >
>  > It might be nice extension to different wallpaper in every release ;)
>
>  How about installing random desktop? This feature can be called
>  "surprise desktop" ;)
>
>  Or write a service to change it daily.  We could have TWM Tuesdays. . . 
-J

>  >
>  > Vít
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > devel mailing list
>  > devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
>
>  --
>  Best regards,
>  Michal
>
>  http://eventhorizon.pl/
>  https://getactive.pl/
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 



-- 
http://cecinestpasunefromage.wordpress.com/
------------------------------------------------
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love

-d. bowie

[drago01]

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  2013/1/29 Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com&gt;:
> > Dne 29.1.2013 14:56, Christopher Meng napsal(a):
> >
> >>
> >> Funny...I suggest that we can submit a changing desktop feature per
> >> release.
> >>
> >> Maybe this is the best solution.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > It might be nice extension to different wallpaper in every release ;)
>
>  How about installing random desktop? This feature can be called
>  "surprise desktop" ;) 
How about not feeding trolls? This feature can be called "troll starvation" ;)

[Jóhann B. Guðmundsson]

On 01/29/2013 01:38 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  On 01/27/2013 03:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
> >
> > Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
> >
> > This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop 
> > interface from
> > Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is more
> > familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell 
> > interface,
> > while being built from Gnome 3 components.
>
>  Though I certainly would welcome Fedora to switch away from Gnome3 as 
>  default desktop, I do not see much sense in switching to Cinnamon, 
>  because Cinnamon is too similar to Gnome3.
>
>  Instead, I'd propose Fedora to switch away from having *any* default 
>  GUI and offer Fedora users an equal choice between all different major 
>  DE Fedora ships (e.g. Gnome3, Cinnamon, MATE, KDE. xfce ...) 
That's the only right and correct way forward and then this "default" 
*DE dispute can finally be put to rest...

JBG

[Adam Williamson]

On Tue, 2013-01-29 at 14:13 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>  On 01/29/2013 01:38 PM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
>  > On 01/27/2013 03:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>  >> = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>  >>
>  >> Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
>  >>
>  >> This feature proposes that Fedora switch the default desktop 
>  >> interface from
>  >> Gnome 3 to Cinnamon. Cinnamon provides a desktop interface that is more
>  >> familiar to Windows and Gnome 2 users than the standard Gnome Shell 
>  >> interface,
>  >> while being built from Gnome 3 components.
>  >
>  > Though I certainly would welcome Fedora to switch away from Gnome3 as 
>  > default desktop, I do not see much sense in switching to Cinnamon, 
>  > because Cinnamon is too similar to Gnome3.
>  >
>  > Instead, I'd propose Fedora to switch away from having *any* default 
>  > GUI and offer Fedora users an equal choice between all different major 
>  > DE Fedora ships (e.g. Gnome3, Cinnamon, MATE, KDE. xfce ...)
>  
>  That's the only right and correct way forward and then this "default" 
>  *DE dispute can finally be put to rest... 
I mentioned this idea in my post yesterday. I don't think it's really
practical to 'not have a default', for a few reasons listed there, which
you don't seem to have addressed.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net

[Jens-Ulrik Petersen]

How about doing a Cinnamon Spin at least for F19?

[Miloslav Trmač]

On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
>
>  Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt; 
Most if not all packages are actually owned by Leigh Scott, who I
haven't seen participate in the discussion in the feature.  Leigh,
what do you think about the proposal?
    Mirek

[Dan Mashal]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Miloslav Trmač <mitr(a)volny.cz&gt; wrote:
>  On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Jaroslav Reznik
> <jreznik(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
> > = Features/Cinnamon as Default Desktop =
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Cinnamon_as_Default_Desktop
> >
> > Feature owner(s): Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com&gt;
>
>  Most if not all packages are actually owned by Leigh Scott, who I
>  haven't seen participate in the discussion in the feature.  Leigh,
>  what do you think about the proposal?
>      Mirek
>  --
>  devel mailing list
>  devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel 
If I may comment here, as someone who has been working with Leigh for
the past few months on various things.

Leigh's getting a kick out of it (this discussion) as far as I an tell
and I don't think he'd be opposed to it provided he actually had some
support besides upstream and myself. I didn't really do much except
watch Bugzilla and commits since I did his package review which was
stalled for 7+ months.

You see the Cinnamon/MATE community is pretty closely tied together.

FYI Cinnamon upstream the Linux Mint development team.

https://github.com/linuxmint/cinnamon

Linux Mint it is actually how I discovered both DEs.

I spoke with Clem Lefebvre (creator of Linux Mint) last night they
have a great upstream core of developers.

Thanks,
Dan

[Michael Scherer]

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 11:09:07AM -0800, Dan Mashal wrote:
>  I spoke with Clem Lefebvre (creator of Linux Mint) last night they
>  have a great upstream core of developers. 
With all due respect, and after having looked to a bit of various
mint source code ( mint-foo tools and various cinnamon related git ), 
could you be more explicit about what you mean by "a great upstream
core" ? You mean the size, the quality of code, the reactivity ?

-- 
Michael Scherer