Ubuntu Dev Summit Lays Out Plans For Hardy Heron

Opurt writes "On the first day of the Ubuntu Developer Summit in Boston this week, a roundtable session focused on the vision for the upcoming Hardy Heron Ubuntu release. Unlike Gutsy Gibbon, which brought a handful of experimental features along with some new functionality, the focus with Heron will be on robustness as it will be supported on the desktop for 3 years. 'The Compiz window manager, which adds sophisticated visual effects to the Ubuntu user interface, will be a big target for usability improvements. Keyboard bindings and session management were noted as two areas where Compiz still needs some work.' PolicyKit and Tracker will also be significantly tweaked, while Heron is also likely to see a complete visual refresh."

Looking at the release schedule

[morgan_greywolf]

It'll be a while for before Hardy Heron is Hardly Hereyet (*bada bum*!) But seriously, I'd like to see some big improvements in Gnome file management. Much of this could be done with pre-configured custom Nautilus actions, but where Nautilus could use some help:

• Recursive file permissions and ownership changes: Nautilus' interface for this clunky and doesn't work right.
• Directory compare & synchronization: sync two folders by content. Yes, I know there are tools for this, but most of them are too difficult for the average user to setup and use.
• Easy interface for massive file renames by pattern matching. See the support for this in Total Commander. Really easy.
• Install the GNOME GPG frontend by default. (is this already in Gutsy?)
• 
  
  Other stuff I'd like to see:
  
  
• Support for ext3 extended attributes and ACLs turned on by default.
• An easy interface for installing QEMU and Windows like QEMU Launcher and QEMU Control polished and fully supported by Canonical.
• LVM and RAID supported in the graphical installer. C'mon, guys, LOTS of people use RAID and LVM, especially now that most new computers have an integrated SATA RAID controller!

Re:Ubuntu To Do List

[johannesg]

Have you even considered the proposals on their own merits? Keeping a clean filesystem is a noble goal, and definitely worth considering.

Oh, and that attitude of yours is what I consider to be the *PRIMARY* thing that's wrong with Linux. But I guess it will be hard to fix as well...

Experiences

[PinkyDead]

If I was asked what things annoyed me most about Feisty (Offtopic?!), I would have said two things: Printers and all that stuff you needed Automatix for. Everything else was pretty much fine.

Along comes Gutsy and... Printers, wow! - doesn't get easier, and Automatix? I've been using Gutsy for about 2 months now and I still haven't downloaded Automatix (Sorry guys, great tool - but don't need it anymore)

Gutsy brings Ubuntu to a level where it can really stand up against the likes of Windows (even coming out better in a lot of surveys than Vista). Compiz is incredible - and anyone I know with Windows stands open-mouthed when they see it.

Heron really needs to up the level way beyond what it is at now, and become the Windows Slayer. I have no idea how they would do that though.

can we just use numbers, please.

[Anonymous Coward]

I know this comes from the great tradition of Debian "Woody".

But really, lets just use numbers.
Or at least no more stupid adjectives.

Apple didn't use Lanky|Leggy Leepard for reason.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List

[johannesg]

But I have to ask the obvious question here: In just what way does Linux NOT have a clean filesystem?

In the way that files that belong to applications are spread over a dozen directories. To name just one example: why is it considered a good idea to have a single directory with all the help files for everything that is installed? Just put them in the application directory already. It reduces the chances of having naming clashes with files that are already there, and it would allow installation and de-installation using nothing more than drag and drop instead of the elaborate scripting systems now in place. It would also make it far easier to understand what specific files do: if you now find a file, let's say /etc/y13f4, and assuming for a moment that there is nothing on your system even remotely called "y13f4", would you know what it is for or who put it there? If every application was well-behaved and stored that file in $appdir/etc/ it would be utterly clear to everyone that it was part of that specific application. And then there is security: access to files in /etc and other directories could be far more limited than it is today, since no applications would have any business sticking their files there.

And let's have a look how Windows does it: every application writes a bunch of crap into the registry, and everyone is moaning about it. Yet when it is UNIX doing it it is fine? That really doesn't make ANY sense.

Yes, the idea that we want full control over our OS, rather than it having full control of us, is a bad thing.

I cannot image where that came from. Are you sure you were even replying to my post?

Also, the idea that we should not strive too hard to copy the ideas of someone else is a bad thing. I can definitely see the point in not avoiding lawsuits or stale, cheap imitations or accusations that we're just copying off of somebody else.

There are really only two models for storing applications: store everything related to the application together in one folder (the model used by Commodore and Apple), or to store everything all over the filesystem (the model used by UNIX and Windows). So you get to be like Windows, or you get to be like Apple. On that basis I would strongly prefer to be more like Apple - even when discounting the advantages of that model.

I completely understand now that the first Model T was the penultimate in cars because it was made by professionals, and we should never have made cars which were different.

But you do believe we should stick with the original UNIX model of storing files all over the place? I guess you must: you are violently attacking me when I support a proposed change to the original model.

My alternative theory is that you urgently need to take some more medication.

Okay, rant over. I guess I'm just not sure what you mean by keeping a clean filesystem. Please to elaborate, so that I may investigate its feasability. No seriously, I need something to do.

Oh, NOW I see: you are the person in charge of development over at Ubuntu! Sorry, I had no idea! Well, it is really simple. The original poster would like to see a system whereby applications don't write crap all over the /etc, /var, /lib, /usr, /usr/lib, /var/log, and whereever you stick manfiles these days. Instead he would like to store ALL THAT SHIT in one directory (per application, of course). Wouldn't that be neat? Moreover, I support that position: it would be extremely neat.

Of course, I realize this represents a Change From The Way Things Were. I understand the fear and uncertainty ANY change causes. Really! But rather than simply be an uber-arrogant asshole and say "rejected" without ANY consideration or discussion of the merits of the stated idea, we could and should have had a civilized discussion why this is good or bad.

Your baseless flaming of me, mostly based on statements that I did not actually make but only occurred in your head, unfortunately rules out that possibility. Too bad, but maybe we can try again in three years or so...

Re:Ubuntu To Do List

[johannesg]

Thank you for a well-thought out reply. However, I'd like to point out that I was already well aware of why things are the way they are; I just don't agree with the reasons anymore. I don't believe that system administration is well-served by having files everywhere, or rather, that it could be better served by having files centralized. Even if you want to share packages between different users, symlinks provide a much better way to make applications visible within their own home directories without taking up massive amounts of space - and without losing the benefit of giving each user his own set of preferences, or being able to store the packages on a networked drive. As for the reasons why Ubuntu keeps things the way they are, my guess is they don't want to change thousands of packages, rather than holding any firm believe in things being better as they are. And didn't OS X start out from a UNIX core? The fact that Apple made this change is also a hint.

Re:Ubuntu To Do List

[swillden]

I don't believe that system administration is well-served by having files everywhere, or rather, that it could be better served by having files centralized.

Why? Given a decent package manager (and Ubuntu has an excellent one), what does it matter?

Here's a data point for you -- my wife's iBook is off for repairs (and Apple appears to have lost it since it's been gone for two weeks) -- so she's using Gutsy on a Thinkpad I had lying around. She quite likes OS X and is very comfortable with the drag'n'drop installation approach, but she was very impressed by Ubuntu's Add/Remove Software app, and commented that Apple should do something like it.

Re:Maybe it's time Ubuntu got a icon

[pintpusher]

Ubuntu has done a fabulous job with Debian's beginnings [...] Personally, I love Ubuntu. And I've grown to love it [...] for it's product as well.

I think Ubuntu is great in that it is helping people migrate away from the default OS.

But I have to say, Debian *itself* is a great product. There seems to be this idea that Ubuntu is the usable Debian, and that's just not true. Debian has become really a very advanced OS in terms of usability, portability, and reliability. Debian is so much more than just a great beginning for other OSes to build on.

Granted, its not the bee's knees in terms of the latest versions of apps and so forth (talking stable here), but talk about a system you can rely on...

Finally, to those who complain that Debian is too slow to upgrade: Look at how often the average user upgrades their windows system... umm... how old is XP? How many win98/2k boxes are still out there? There is nothing wrong with using Debian stable for 2-3 years and then upgrading. The payoff is a rock solid system that "just works".

I love debian. There I said it. :-P

Re:Screw That - We Need Hasslefree Wifi With WPA P

[theshowmecanuck]

not drag and drop easy... how do you install a package if it is running from the cd? I've used Linux for almost 10 years. But I am tired of having to work like hell to get stuff that should just work to work. I want to use the tool not build it. At one time Linux wasn't just about using a tool (the OS) it was about building and playing with the tool. I'm not into that part anymore. If I want to program a business app on a computer, I want to program the business app. Programming today is starting to be too much about configuring a million different frameworks to work together... so much so it is a pain in the ass. I don't need to worry about having to continually build and configure my OS too. :)