GNOME Dev Schaller Assures Ubuntu Users the Move To Step Away From Unity Will Bring Consistency Across Linux Distros (gnome.org) 104
Earlier this week, Canonical announced that Ubuntu will be ditching Unity as the default user interface on desktops to go back to GNOME next year. The company also said that it will be ending development of Ubuntu software for phones and tablets, in what is a push to focus on cloud. In a blog post, Christian Schaller, a developer on Fedora and GNOME (and Senior Software Engineering Manager at Red Hat), offered some assurance to the community that this is the right move in the grand scheme of things. He writes on an official blog post: We look forward to keep working with great Canonical and Ubuntu people like Allison Lortie and Robert Ancell on projects of shared interest around GNOME, Wayland and hopefully Flatpak. It is worth mentioning that even as we [have] been competing with Unity and Ubuntu, we have also been collaborating with them, most recently on [the] integration of features they wanted from GNOME Software such as user reviews. Of course now sharing a bigger set of technologies collaboration will be even easier. I am personally happy to see this convergence of efforts happening because I have -- for a long time -- felt that the general level of investment in the Linux desktop has not been great enough to justify the plethora of Linux desktops out there. Now having reached a position where Canonical, Endless, Red Hat and Suse again share one desktop technology stack and along with consulting companies such as Centricular, CodeThink, Collabora and Igalia helping push parts of the stack forward, we are at least all pulling in the same direction. This change should also make life easier for ISV who now have a more clear target if they want to try to integrate their UI with the Linux desktop as 'the linux desktop' becomes a more meaningful term with this change.
Unity (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Not a fan of Mint here, but even though they offered no GUI app for upgrading you could always do it with apt-get full-upgrade and at worst some manual dpkg usage just like any Debian-based system
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Why can't you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks, but this is the same as I said about Mint: "even though they offered no GUI app for upgrading you could always do it with apt-get full-upgrade and at worst some manual dpkg usage just like any Debian-based system".
And in the mean time I also googled and confirmed that it can be done the same as any Debian system: change the distribution in sources list; apt-get update; apt-get full-upgrade. The danger is just that if they do not test it, the dependencies may be a bit bumpy. This is what dpkg is for.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
That's fine, but it's different to "can't do it" and not different to what I described for Mint from the beginning.
Supported or not, upgrades are not always problem free even in systems that offer a supported path like Ubuntu, which is why Mint and Elementary don't in the first place.
Whenever you upgrade you should know what you are doing, but thanks to the dependency system it would be immediately obvious whether all dependencies are fulfilled, and you should get at prompt for each changed configuration fi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
KDE (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
GNOME is a lateral one.
Compared to... what? Even from Metro the direction is slightly slanted down.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
KDE never had a chance, it's been consistently sabotaged and undermined by various fanatics within Debian and Redhat since all the way back from the start. GNOME is all about ideology, and not being KDE. That's why it sucks, and that's why it's attracted the current breed of "my way or the highway" developers, which makes it suck even more.
Re: KDE (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
KDE! (Score:1)
And just to make sure we over all the bases in flames, SH is better than CSH and VI is better than EMACS.
BURN IT DOWN!
Re: KDE! (Score:2)
Hahahaha, no can't do it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Xemacs? You know Xemacs is pretty close to dead don't you?
Also zsh descends from sh, not csh.
Re: (Score:2)
Also zsh descends from sh, not csh.
Are you sure you don't mean [google.com] ksh [wikipedia.org]?
Oh FFS... (Score:1)
Just when I'd finally got used to the damn thing, after years of complaining about its early versions...
Re: (Score:2)
I feel your pain. If there is something that I dislike more than a bad user interface, it is when it is changed to a different bad user interface.
Ubuntu goes Wayland (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Ubuntu removes support for proprietary graphiccard drivers
Schaller the asshole (Score:1)
LOL. Trust Schaller to be an asshole. Symptomatic he couldn't stop himself from lying about suse - which pretty much is a bastion of KDE, just to stroke his own ego.
No thanks... (Score:2, Insightful)
Still not going back to Ubuntu after Unity. Gnome 3 isn't the right direction either for me. Maybe if they put their eggs in the Mate or Cinnamon basket I'd give them a whirl again but that isn't the case. Would have been really nice if they went with Mate instead, that'd draw me back.
Re: (Score:3)
Linux MINT == Ubuntu minus the suck desktop plus your choice of MATE or Cinnamon
Re: (Score:2)
Linux MINT == Ubuntu minus the suck desktop plus your choice of MATE or Cinnamon
Or just use the Ubuntu MATE flavor.
Note: I do like Mint, but don't like being yet another step removed from Debian (or Ubuntu ...).
Re: (Score:2)
MINT teams listens to end users though for design; Ubuntu regularly tries to cram some random brainfart up the end user's ass
Re:Just what we need.... (Score:4, Informative)
Size. Pretty much every mainstream distro is a respin of RH simply because they've got the most folks working on it and it would be an absolute buggerbastard of a job to untangle all Lennart's shit from it.
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much every mainstream distro is a respin of RH
Wow you got a +4 informative for that? Tell me, how is Debian which came out a year before RedHat a respin of RedHat? And while you're answering, Google the desktop market share of distros just for shits and giggles to see how few mainstream distributions, especially popular ones actually are based on RedHat.
Re: (Score:2)
You are correct, but so is the GGP's point ... it's RH's influence that's concerning. It's not that RH is "evil," it's that it's just so big. Being big in itself is no crime, but if major applications start relying on stuff that's standard on RHEL and its derivatives but might not be standard on other distros (let's say systemd, just for argument's sake), then those other distros are pretty much forced to follow RH's lead or start slipping into irrelevancy. Their only other choice would be to pony up the re
Re: (Score:2)
The people that bitch about systemd are often oblivious to the fact that it wasn't adopted in the Debian stream because of ties with RH but rather due to technical merits which were discussed by their core team publicly and in great detail.
The people that bitch about monoculture are free to do something else. It's open source. Put your money where your mouth is, or put the mouth away. Based on what was happening on forums I was able to conclude that in 2016: The world would implode. RH and Debian would ceas
Shocking. (Score:5, Insightful)
A developer of GNOME thinks that one of the largest Linux distros giving up on their own DE and going back to GNOME is a great thing.
This is like that article a few days back where GE said that more robots in the factory was nothing to worry about.
Dear Slashdot: I'd be far more interested in commentary by people who don't have a conflict of interest with the topic.
Re: (Score:2)
That's kinda what the comments section is for, don't you think?
I mean, we know that most tech articles on Slashdot are bullshit. The comments are where the bullshit gets composted.
Gnome 3 is Terrible (Score:2, Insightful)
Gnome 3 is just too different, no minimize/maximize buttons out of the box, I cant have a single taskbar with a list of open applications and the notification center. I dont understand how enterprise users would want such a jarring change, but I'm no UI developer.
Re: (Score:2)
I know this will go over badly, but I really wish WindowMaker had compositing support, for window scaling to help me find the windows I need. If it had that, it would be my window manager again in a heartbeat (full 'desktop environments' have been overrated).
Re: (Score:2)
I know this will go over badly, but I really wish WindowMaker had compositing support, for window scaling to help me find the windows I need. If it had that, it would be my window manager again in a heartbeat (full 'desktop environments' have been overrated).
Coincidental that you say this - I've just cloned the compiz repo (and emerald decorator repo) because I want to use my build of WindowMaker with compiz.
Nothing may come off it, but I already run a pretty customised WindowMaker (customised in the sources, that is), so perhaps I'll get WindowMaker built as a compiz-compatible decorator.
Cinnamon is a much Better Desktop (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
and also there is MATE for for those that liked GNOME before it went off on a weird tangent of being mental masturbation for developers rather than doing what users wanted or needed.
Re: (Score:2)
Consistency all right (Score:2)
Consistency (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Consistency (Score:4, Informative)
Try them all out then
sudo apt-get remove $THE_ONES_YOU_DONT_WANT
Nobody's forcing anything on you.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember when distributions had personality and originality.
Major distributions never had personality and originality beyond their package manager. They all converged on the same default formula very early on. Funny enough they were based around the largest and most feature rich packages available for the platform. About the only differences that survived were two package management schemes.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't remembers shit. Honestly right now there is a lot of diversity in Linux distros. Take the classical ones like Debian and Red Hat - completely the same right? I bet you haven't even touched RHEL since you need to pay for it.... OK take Debian and CentOS. Quite similar - OK. Then take Gentoo and Arch Linux. Same yep? OK. Maybe try CoreOS? Alpine Linux maybe? Same shit eh?
Consistency.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Consistency should not be the one and only goal. If that's all we wanted, we could have just rolled with whatever Microsoft felt like handing down.
I'm unhappy that pretty much all the major linux distros are the same nowadays, with RedHat pretty much calling the shots for everyone. Particularly since I disagree with them on much of their recent vision. Nowadays whether I choose Ubuntu, Debian, Mint, Fedora, or OpenSuSE, it's all substantially the same thing: whatever RedHat thinks it should be. Sure there's this big divide in deb versus rpm, but that's far less relevant day to day than the software stack that gets installed.
Of course, Mir and Unity weren't exactly the things I really would have favored.
Gnome is interesting, in that I think in terms of relaibilty/quality, it does quite well. However UI wise it's frustrating and a bit too high and mighty. Customize your desktop? Only if you are a programmer, otherwise you are stuck with what they give you. They think a tray is 'evil' and endeavor to punish apps trying to do tray things by making them massively annoying by default (requiring 'topicons plus' for remotely sane behavior). They finally have some semblance of window search, but the UI is atrocious, making their expose rip off of limited utility.
KDE tends to have a more compatibile UI vision with me, but too many glitchy behaviors crop up every time I go to use it, and not-quite fully executed concepts.
I'm encouraged by MATE's recent porting to GTK3, though the time it took was a worrying sign of how well they will do at keeping currency moving forward.
What really disappoints me is that GNUstep/Windowmaker has not gotten more care and feeding. I still enjoy the experience, but without compositing and particularly scaling windows with some sort of search, I just can't bring myself to use it.
Re: (Score:1)
I use a minimal interface such as gnome 2 - (gnome-session-flashback on ubuntu these days).
Bind alt-1 through alt-9 to go to desktops 1 through 9
Bind alt-m to minimize window
Maybe I'm missing more parts of GNUstep/windowmaker, but it's quick enough to switch between workspaces that all other desktops have bothered me since using it.
Re: (Score:2)
The robust support for managing applications versus application windows (e.g. alt-h would quickly mask all windows of an application). Interestingly, Gnome shell at least has alt-tab, alt-above tab to facilitate switching between applications versus windows, it's one of the things they actually do right for me (though it's jarring for those who just do windows alt-tab). The shared menubar would have been preferable to the general gnome approach of generally ditching menubars alltogether.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with the point but not with the example.
Using a few things in "Control Panel" shows how inconsistent the MS bucket of assorted GUIs is. Not even Microsoft stick to whatever Microsoft felt like handing down.
Cinnamon is a Better Desktop thank Gnome (Score:3)
I have called for the removal of the Gnome leaders, for abandoning people who need to get work done.
Activities menu? You have to be kidding me!
Learning the same lesson over and over (Score:2)
I can't see the current version of Gnome as being a better choice than Unity or even the previous (deliberately incompatible to the point of breakage if it's on the same system) version of Gnome.
Trying to converge everyone to that is IMHO doomed to failure even if RedHat push it as hard as they have pushed tryi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you being serious or is that some sort of attempt at a trolling suggestion about continued systemd creep into yet another area?
Gnome is the desktop that RedHat is paying developers to work on so it effectively IS the desktop environment equivalent of systemd (it's just far better administered so there are far less complaints than there are about systemd).
Re: (Score:2)
Gnome is the desktop that RedHat is paying developers to work on so it effectively IS the desktop environment equivalent of systemd (it's just far better administered so there are far less complaints than there are about systemd).
I mean that systemd essentially took linux distribution world by storm, and not because RH was behind it. Init system had flaws and while other init systems did try to fix those problems, systemd swept away both the competition and the SystemV because distribution maintainers preferred it. We might argue about what makes software objectively good, but as far as adoption is concerned, if there will pop up a desktop environment that will be far superior than GNOME, it will be adopted and GNOME will be pushed
Re: (Score:2)
I think you will find that is the sole reason. Nobody else was paying for as many developers so all the other distros are repackaging RedHat's work.
Lennart's traveling roadshow trying to push systemd hard what must be nearly a decade ago didn't get any takers so it's almost a 100% RedHat product, others didn't want to work on it.
The only problem it is a solution to is that the init system (and all the other bits the octopus got into) was not under the control of Lennart.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody else was paying for as many developers so all the other distros are repackaging RedHat's work.
I agree that RedHat investment helped to develop systemd and that RedHat can force systemd on RHEL and Fedora, leaving it's forks with little choice. But I don't believe that Debian, or Arch or openSUSE adopted it just because Red Hat did. If it was the case, rpm based package management would be on all Linux distributions.
There's still a design of binary logging, and not much of it, with a race condition that would earn a fail in a school project. There's been a stupid move to disable background tasks when a user logs off.
Let me guess, you have read countless discussions on slashdot and elsewhere about how binary logging is awful, then someone points out that plain-text logging is still there live and well
Re: (Score:2)
An init system should not be, especially one developed with an aim to run some parts in para
Re: (Score:2)
He's trying a very different approach to the earlier init systems and it shows
Indeed it is true. Lennert sees chaos and systemd as a cure. You might see a beautiful diversity and modularity, which the systemd stomps on with the one true way. And both of these views have merit, and both have tradeoffs. Take Linux kernel. It is a monolith and you can't easily swap one subsystem for another and be sure that next version won't brake it. It sucks for some, but the community thinks it is better for Linux. I don't know which is the right call here.
An init system should not be, especially one developed with an aim to run some parts in parallel (obviously not all since it still hangs in some situations where the earlier init (correclty) gave up, reported an error and let the next task run).
At least in theory systemd should kill hung
Re: (Score:2)
Ummmm no.
Why are you taking this simpering symcophanitic line that is wildly divergent from reality? The guy is no genius and hasn't even been coding for as long as this site has been up. While that would not normally be a problem he's not learning from what has come before so keeps repeating the mistakes others made (and worked around) long ago.
No, and it doesn't. It has a few design flaws that will probably be
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you taking this simpering symcophanitic line that is wildly divergent from reality?
It seems that we are in a misunderstanding. I am not trying to suck up to you. I have no idea who you are and I'm sure this relation is mutual. And I'm pretty sure Lennart isn't reading any of this either.
The guy is no genius and hasn't even been coding for as long as this site has been up.
I never said he is genius or that he is any good at what he does. But apparently he does not share the same vision as you or the loudest /. community members. Please note that having “vision” is not a sign of any kind intellect either.
Seriously, read his blog.
I did read his blog when systemd was the new kid in town. Bu
Re: (Score:2)
Please stop wasting your time and just go read Lennart's blog so that you can get on the ground floor on this issue.
No, you are bestowing virtual sainthood on a software developer having trouble (much of it his own making) with a difficult project.
That's very "meta" of you but ultimately pointless because the perception comes from real
Re: (Score:2)
Is that both of these projects goals seem to be to REDUCE choice and diversity in the open source ecosystem...
There's no "seem to be" about it - it was pretty much explicitly stated by Schaller: "...I have -- for a long time -- felt that the general level of investment in the Linux desktop has not been great enough to justify the plethora of Linux desktops out there ... This change should also make life easier for ISV...". I would translate that as "All your desktop environments are belong to us, and WE will decide what DE's you are allowed to choose from, (if indeed we even allow you a choice), because we want to