Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME 3.11.2 Has Many Changes

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
    I see. Some Gnome related person sets up a website with a big "NO" on it and somehow it is true for all and everything, just because he says so.
    Really?
    This one person declares that Linux is not about choice and you use it as an absolute fact?
    Wow, is that the style all discussion works in Gnome?
    The person who set it up is not a GNOME person. This website is referred to quite often. Anyways, that was not my point. My point was that loads of developers are not working on Linux to make tinkering nor choice possible. It would be a strange goal anyway, because do you have a choice now? Yes! Is it about choice? No! Can you tinker? Yes! Is it about tinkering? No!

    Maybe you or someone else really likes tinkering and choices. Totally fine, but choice is not a given.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by bkor View Post
      I use Linux a lot. It is really nice that you can adjust things. But adjusting will always be possible: you have the source, you tinker with every part, you can contribute whereever you want, you can build things exactly like upstream does. Tinkering forever: cool, but it also has to work. Then if it works, it can be fun to take apart and figure things out. But saying that the main purpose is tinkering? That's not why a lot of people are contributing. Seems related to: http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com.
      Stable and enterprise distros Just Work (tm).

      I've been using Linux exclusively since 1999. With a sane distribution, you don't have to worry about plumbing if you don't want to.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
        Wrong. Adam Jackson is a Xorg developer and doesn't work on GNOME.
        A short whois shows that the site islinuxaboutchoice.com is registered to a person named Emmanuele Bassi, who shows up at Linkedin as
        Director at GNOME Foundation
        Member at GNOME Foundation
        I would definitely say that this site is related to at least one GNOME person. But even if that site was created from an Xorg developer, why should his opinion on that topic count more than those of other people?

        My point was that loads of developers are not working on Linux to make tinkering nor choice possible. It would be a strange goal anyway, because do you have a choice now? Yes! Is it about choice? No! Can you tinker? Yes! Is it about tinkering? No!

        Maybe you or someone else really likes tinkering and choices. Totally fine, but choice is not a given.
        Again. Linux was designed as a UNIX-like. The main advantage of UNIX-like systems is that I can combine tools of my choice to do a job I want to be done, in a certain way.
        Anyways, the GNOME developers can use the tools and dependencies they want (it is their choice). But they should have the balls to do so openly. Portability is not an aim of GNOME, otherwise they would do some work to be fully compatible to more than Linux and not have developers that actively try to make it impossible to run on other platforms. They also should simply have the balls to say: "Hey, look, we have chosen to be dependent on systemd, so what?" instead of constantly defending their choices with the same phrases about how you can just write your own logind interfaces.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by bkor View Post
          It would be a strange goal anyway, because do you have a choice now? Yes! Is it about choice? No! Can you tinker? Yes! Is it about tinkering? No!
          Of course it is!

          The two things that attracted me to Linux in the first place were 1) Freedom, 2) tinkering.

          Your thinking seems to go in the direction of providing a slick GPL Macintosh "product". There is certainly a userbase interested in this, but many Linux users do not want this.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Daktyl198 View Post
            Logind is fine. It was developed by the Systemd folks and is a perfectly okay thing. Systemd is a perfectly okay thing. The "bullying" I'm talking about is drawing in outside projects that have been around for a while to be under the Systemd flag when they didn't HAVE to as this forces people that want to use that project to use Systemd. This is honestly the only thing I don't like about it: a single stack is nice and I've used Systemd before. I like it.
            You make it sound like the systemd people somehow force other projects to join. Other projects are choosing to join because the project developers think their projects will benefit from it. Where is the "bullying" in that? And how are the systemd maintainers the bullies when it was the maintainers of the other projects that made the decision to join?

            Are you saying that two projects that think they will both benefit from a closer relationship should be banned from joining? That sounds more like bullying to me.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
              But even if that site was created from an Xorg developer, why should his opinion on that topic count more than those of other people?
              He is a a well known developer who has explained his rationale. Feel free to post your opinion. People just might not give it as much weight but nothing stops you from trying.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                He is a a well known developer who has explained his rationale. Feel free to post your opinion. People just might not give it as much weight but nothing stops you from trying.
                Sure, he is entitled to his opinion as is everybody else. What I am criticizing here is that Gnome developers speak one way to their users, but act different. Of course the Gnome developers have the choice to develop their DE as they see fit. If that way is reducing choice or complexity so be it, but they propagate that they would give the people the choice on which system they can run Gnome, while they in reality only support Linux and some of them even actively try to make it harder to run on anything not Linux.
                If they just would say: "See, we develop Gnome for Linux and we have dependencies on systemd, that is how we have decided." no one would care. But they don't. They tell people: "Hey, portability is one of Gnome's aims. Look here, you can run Gnome on OpenBSD. Of course you will not be able to use some functions, like power-management, but we have an easy fix for that: We (despite living in an age of mobile devices) just declare those features 'not essential'."

                The Gnome people should grow some balls, declare openly what their goals are and then stick to it (which means also: if a Gnome developer is acting against those goals he should be made aware that this behavior is not appreciated).
                I doubt that will happen, but who knows?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                  If they just would say: "See, we develop Gnome for Linux and we have dependencies on systemd, that is how we have decided." no one would care. But they don't. They tell people: "Hey, portability is one of Gnome's aims. Look here, you can run Gnome on OpenBSD. Of course you will not be able to use some functions, like power-management, but we have an easy fix for that: We (despite living in an age of mobile devices) just declare those features 'not essential'."
                  Isn't it a much better approach to try to be cross platform as long as it is reasonable?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                    Sure, he is entitled to his opinion as is everybody else. What I am criticizing here is that Gnome developers speak one way to their users, but act different. Of course the Gnome developers have the choice to develop their DE as they see fit. If that way is reducing choice or complexity so be it, but they propagate that they would give the people the choice on which system they can run Gnome, while they in reality only support Linux and some of them even actively try to make it harder to run on anything not Linux.
                    Nonsense. Noone is ever actively trying to make it harder to run on non-linux systems. Just that Linux as a kernel provides more functionality and features that GNOME integrates with and if other operating systems lack those features, it is not the job of desktop environment developers to fix it. If your suggestion is that GNOME should target only the lowest common base functionality and nothing else in the name of portability and avoid innovating and taking advantage of the things Linux is good at just because OpenBSD doesn't have resources to catch up on evolving interfaces, I strongly disagree with that notion.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                      Nonsense. Noone is ever actively trying to make it harder to run on non-linux systems. Just that Linux as a kernel provides more functionality and features that GNOME integrates with and if other operating systems lack those features, it is not the job of desktop environment developers to fix it. If your suggestion is that GNOME should target only the lowest common base functionality and nothing else in the name of portability and avoid innovating and taking advantage of the things Linux is good at just because OpenBSD doesn't have resources to catch up on evolving interfaces, I strongly disagree with that notion.
                      First read Vim_users full post, and then answer again, especially tell us where you read that BSDs don't support suspend/Hibernate/... Because that is where where gnome currently depends hard on systemd. And that's what Gnome developers sell as being not an important feature...

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by schmalzler View Post
                        First read Vim_users full post, and then answer again, especially tell us where you read that BSDs don't support suspend/Hibernate/... Because that is where where gnome currently depends hard on systemd. And that's what Gnome developers sell as being not an important feature...
                        Again, wrong. Neither of you have apparently looked up why. upower interfaces have changed and OpenBSD doesn't support the newer interfaces. GNOME relies on upower for power management but it is an freedesktop component and not a GNOME module. Complaining about upower changes to GNOME project is pointless.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                          Again, wrong. Neither of you have apparently looked up why. upower interfaces have changed and OpenBSD doesn't support the newer interfaces. GNOME relies on upower for power management but it is an freedesktop component and not a GNOME module. Complaining about upower changes to GNOME project is pointless.
                          Grrr! upower has nothing to do with suspending your computer! At least in gnome... It's done in gnome-settings-daemon's power-plugin. But it seems as if they changed direct systemd-calls to dbus-calls for logind. But it might be I am too lazy and those calls still exist. Last time I checked there WERE direct calls to systemd (not proxied by dbus) for suspend/Hibernate.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by schmalzler View Post
                            Grrr! upower has nothing to do with suspending your computer! At least in gnome... It's done in gnome-settings-daemon's power-plugin. But it seems as if they changed direct systemd-calls to dbus-calls for logind. But it might be I am too lazy and those calls still exist. Last time I checked there WERE direct calls to systemd (not proxied by dbus) for suspend/Hibernate.
                            I don't buy that. Maybe you should stop being lazy and look it up. upower uses logind in the newer versions. If you are porting, you are supposed to change the underlying implementation to match whatever your OS exposes for the same functionality if it exists.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by schmalzler View Post
                              Grrr! upower has nothing to do with suspending your computer! At least in gnome... It's done in gnome-settings-daemon's power-plugin. But it seems as if they changed direct systemd-calls to dbus-calls for logind. But it might be I am too lazy and those calls still exist. Last time I checked there WERE direct calls to systemd (not proxied by dbus) for suspend/Hibernate.
                              Since you are being lazy, let me show you a reference to backup my claim

                              https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desk.../msg00062.html

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by RahulSundaram View Post
                                Since you are being lazy, let me show you a reference to backup my claim

                                https://mail.gnome.org/archives/desk.../msg00062.html
                                Where does that post mention upower? It also does not say that PM at that moment is decoupled from systemd, but if more work is done it is possible. Probably it was done in the meantime, because I know that I read in the sources (and that is the only thing that counts) direct calls to systemd suspend function (direct, not proxied by login1 dbus interface).
                                https://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-s...manager.c#n889
                                This function (action_suspend) AFAIR directly called systemd the last time I checked. It also does not use upower but logind. I started to browse the history, and that is where I got lazy, as there are many commits...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X