Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Enlightenment 0.21 Released With Its Much Better Wayland Support

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

  • Enlightenment 0.21 Released With Its Much Better Wayland Support

    Phoronix: Enlightenment 0.21 Released With Its Much Better Wayland Support

    Another Enlightenment release, another round of significant Wayland improvements. Enlightenment continues with its very well vetted Wayland support that should be roughly on par with the GNOME Wayland experience...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...DR-21-Released

  • #2
    I know some frown upon them, but I love me some wobbly windows

    Comment


    • #3
      I do wonder how this stacks up against the Moksha desktop Bohdi forked from E17. All of those bugfixes the E team ignored, the many rewrites of features that already worked, and pull requests denied, as well as the fact that (idk if this is still true or not, but it was at the time) they don't even use Enlightenment as their primary WM/desktop.

      It's clear that they drastically changed Enlightenment from what it was at the time of the Moksha forking, so they diverged a lot faster than I thought they would. Sort of a DragonflyBSD-FreeBSD kinda deal, if you will.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by tigerroast View Post
        I do wonder how this stacks up against the Moksha desktop Bohdi forked from E17.
        Whoa, Moksha has sane themes that don't make it look like embedded shit like Enlightenment.
        Their worse themes are about on par with LXDE, and not total puke-causing garbage.

        Clear sign of superiority if you ask me.

        Sort of a DragonflyBSD-FreeBSD kinda deal, if you will.
        More like MATE or Cinnamon vs GNOME 3.
        Whishing best of luck to Bodhi devs, as that's the only Enlightment DE I would actually try.

        Comment


        • #5
          You people are on drugs if you think that a fork will be better than what the devs use and develop on.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
            You people are on drugs if you think that a fork will be better than what the devs use and develop on.
            Forks can port all code they want from the parent project (and the reverse is also true), the only difference is that the leadership is different and can decide to keep shit from going live.

            If they decide to closely follow upstream anyway. MATE and Cinnamon did not for example.
            Last edited by starshipeleven; 30 June 2016, 05:33 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
              Forks can port all code they want from the parent project (and the reverse is also true), the only difference is that the leadership is different and can decide to keep shit from going live.

              If they decide to closely follow upstream anyway. MATE and Cinnamon did not for example.
              spoken truly with no knowledge of how different moshka and enlightenment upstream are. they have diverged so far that you have pretty much no chance of porting anything but trivial changes to relatively uninteresting bits of the wm. moshka is not following at all. it's a "we don't want to change so we're staying stuck on a release that came out in 2012 and hacking it up the way we want because we disagree with internal changes that had to be made to move to wayland". the point of moshka was NOT to follow.

              there is now a 3.5 year development gap between them and upstream has moved rapidly with moshka not moving much at all. that's 6100 or so commits since then in upstream - or a total diff of 1.25 million lines in size.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by tigerroast View Post
                All of those bugfixes the E team ignored
                ignored? wll. some patches will have been rejected. some bugs didn't get fixed. but please cease with such outlandish statements that imply we just ignore eveyrthing without actually fact checking. you're obviously listening to some stories. these below would-be bugfixes or features (patches) submitted. something like ~99% of them have been either closed (merged in) or abandoned. something like 70% of them accepted.

                https://phab.enlightenment.org/diffe...bfb7fmkxYx0/#R

                now bugs. let's look at resolved bugs:

                https://phab.enlightenment.org/manip...tgj3vk4QBXv/#R

                let's look at still open bugs:

                https://phab.enlightenment.org/manip...GKOfNYFfYCA/#R

                and invalid bugs:

                https://phab.enlightenment.org/manip...kTD1WSKUtG7/#R

                give or take, about 1/3rd each. bugs are looked at and fixed. maybe not as fast as you'd like, but they are not just ignored. you *IMPLY* that pretty much all bugs and/or patches are ignored. 2/3rd of bugs them are resolved one way or another (invalid or fixed), and just about every patch submission, the other 1/3rd of bugs are still open for discussion or being worked on, or perhaps have been forgotten - if someone pinged it'd remind someone.

                go dig through the dev portal history. it's fact there in public. it has all the content of development there. it's not a story told with bias.

                Originally posted by tigerroast View Post
                the many rewrites of features that already worked,
                what rewrites? like compositing? we are moving to wayland. it needed a lot of work as a result. the widget work was to align e's widgets with elementary's toolkit. as a matter of history, e's widgets are much older and don't come from the standard toolkit ones. the toolkit ones appeared later. bryce? ok - i'm dubious on this one. i think gadcon could have just gone with using the more modern hints on objects rather than the gadcon class interface - it didn't need a rewrite. other than these? the MANY rewrites we didn't need? explain? list them?

                Originally posted by tigerroast View Post
                and pull requests denied
                we don't do github. so we don't do pull requests. we have patch submissions as above.

                Originally posted by tigerroast View Post
                as well as the fact that (idk if this is still true or not, but it was at the time) they don't even use Enlightenment as their primary WM/desktop
                total hogwash. of course we use enlightenment. full time. i haven't use anything else for decades for example.
                Last edited by raster; 01 July 2016, 06:10 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by raster View Post
                  spoken truly with no knowledge of how different moshka and enlightenment upstream are.
                  I just said it is entirely possible to do so.

                  total hogwash. of course we use enlightenment. full time. i haven't use anything else for decades.
                  Sorry for the intrusion here, but can you tell me a good place to find Enlightnement themes what give it a modern desktop look and not a Android 2.3.6 look which seems the standard?
                  I mean like those in Bodhi linux (scroll also down to see other three) http://www.bodhilinux.com/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by 89c51 View Post
                    You people are on drugs if you think that a fork will be better than what the devs use and develop on.
                    Wrong statement: I prefer Cinnamon (a lot) compared to Gnome shell.
                    (and no I am not on drugs)

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X