Pages: 1
  Print  
Author Topic: FORK YES  (Read 2837 times)
Offline (Male) RetroX
Posted on: August 17, 2011, 08:48:01 PM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
A GNOME 2 fork is being made.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #1 Posted on: August 17, 2011, 10:53:20 PM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2959

View Profile Email
It's hard to overstate my satisfaction.
Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Offline (Male) Rusky
Reply #2 Posted on: August 18, 2011, 09:52:00 AM

Resident Troll
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 955
MSN Messenger - rpjohnst@gmail.com
View Profile WWW Email
I honestly can't see why people are so attached to GNOME 2, or why they think they need a fork to continue using it. Unity and GNOME 3 are more than just graphical changes- they include or at least use MAJOR technical improvements.

While I can definitely see why people dislike the new shells (I loathe Unity in its current state) they're getting better and should be treated as beta releases since that's what the first few of any open source project really are.

And even if there's no way to convince you to change, there are still multiple desktop environments that are in active development and that still use the old paradigms. Why not just use one of those?

Basically I'm irritated with a GNOME 2 fork, especially when it doesn't aim to update the internals to match the new environments, because there are so many more useful places for people who want to work on a desktop environment to focus their efforts.
Logged
Post made August 18, 2011, 09:54:10 AM was deleted at the author's request.
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #4 Posted on: August 18, 2011, 10:24:44 AM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2959

View Profile Email
Honestly, I'd be fine with GNOME 3's fallback panel if they didn't make organizing it so difficult and fucking it up so easy. You can't lock items to prevent fucking them up. But you can't move them in a correct order; you can only drag them to the end. So you have to drag each item in the order you want it and hope it sticks.

Maybe by now they've worked that out. I'll know once 11.10 comes out.
Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Offline (Male) RetroX
Reply #5 Posted on: August 19, 2011, 02:39:33 PM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
I honestly can't see why people are so attached to GNOME 2, or why they think they need a fork to continue using it. Unity and GNOME 3 are more than just graphical changes- they include or at least use MAJOR technical improvements.
What technical improvements, might I ask?  Because the only "technical improvement" that I see is that GNOME Shell won't work the proprietary graphics drivers, which are the only kind that aren't shit, unfortunately.

The only real improvement is the fact that GTK 3 is now hardware accelerated, which is a huge step in the right direction, however, the other step back is that they're now parsing CSS for theming, which is retarded.

GNOME 2 was a stable and more functional desktop.  You can drop old implementations, but fuck, you don't drop old functionality, and that's what GNOME 3 did.
Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Post made August 19, 2011, 02:41:30 PM was deleted at the author's request.
Offline (Male) Rusky
Reply #7 Posted on: August 19, 2011, 05:37:51 PM

Resident Troll
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 955
MSN Messenger - rpjohnst@gmail.com
View Profile WWW Email
Graphics is probably where most improvements come from. Like you said GTK3 is hardware accelerated. Along with the new shells, the new layers underneath they work with (like Gallium3D) will allow the free graphics drivers to be much better.

My experience with the nouveau drivers was that pre-GNOME 3 they barely functioned at all and then with GNOME 3 they worked exactly like they were supposed to.

GTK3 is also less dependent on X, which will allow for a switch to Wayland, which is much simpler and should further improve the situation with graphics drivers.

CSS is really not a bad idea either, IMO. What's the point of a disgusting mixture of ad-hoc syntaxes when you have a simpler, more widely-understood one that does the exact same thing?

Unity and GNOME 3 are both doing a huge consolidation/reworking of things like notifications, tray icons, etc. While they haven't been able to agree on how to do things in the past they are converging and this will make things much nicer for developers.

However, like I said before you have to treat the new shells as beta for now. They'll reach GNOME 2's stability soon enough. I'm also not entirely sure what functionality from GNOME 2 you're missing, but the same goes for that.
Logged
Offline (Unknown gender) luiscubal
Reply #8 Posted on: August 19, 2011, 05:57:19 PM
Member
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 452

View Profile Email
@Fede-Lasse - "Report" still seems to be on the top right of each post, along with "Quote".

@Rusky - Not sure about GNOME 3, but when Ubuntu updated to the first version with Unity, hardware accelerated environments started failing epically with the NVIDIA proprietary drivers. I'm currently in a non-accelerated GNOME 2. Probably not a Unity problem, since normal hardware accelerated GNOME 2(with whatever windowing manager it uses that relies on the GPU) also seems to fail, but still, at least for me, the Unity generation made the graphics situation worse, not better.

But yes, on the long term, Gallium3D+Wayland seem to be the way to go, although the major proprietary companies for GPUs don't seem to be taking it seriously.
Logged
Offline (Male) Rusky
Reply #9 Posted on: August 19, 2011, 06:24:57 PM

Resident Troll
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 955
MSN Messenger - rpjohnst@gmail.com
View Profile WWW Email
Intel has open source drivers and integrated GPUs are slowly appearing in most intel processors. ATI/AMD has open source drivers for some GPUs. nouveau is a bit iffy but should improve with time.

Gallium3D should make it easier for proprietary drivers to stay up to date as well, and NVidia does at least seem to release updates semi-regularly so maybe we'll get a sane proprietary driver someday.

Basically, the current state of almost everything is horrible, but the future looks bright and it makes more sense to focus on that than on a decade-old desktop environment.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2011, 06:27:23 PM by Rusky » Logged
Offline (Male) RetroX
Reply #10 Posted on: August 19, 2011, 11:35:32 PM

Master of all things Linux
Contributor
Location: US
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1055
MSN Messenger - classixretrox@gmail.com
View Profile Email
Rusky - The idea is that the messy, old formats didn't require much effort to parse.  CSS does.  I dunno; I just have a grudge against using web technologies in the core of an OS.  A lot of programs in GNOME 3 (primarily the shell) use JavaScript, and that really bugs me.

GNOME 2 was much, much more configurable (I mean, even the user controls were dumbed down to nothing as opposed to, you know, just converting them to GTK 3) and the panel was much better.  The fallback panel is crippled.  Nautilus is still the best file manager, but it's irritating to have to do Ctrl + Delete instead of just Delete.

I mean, yes, GTK 3 is better in nearly all aspects from GTK 2, and it's a large improvement.  GNOME 3 should have been (mostly) a port of GNOME 2's stuff to GTK 3, but instead, it just reimplemented everything in a really dumbed-down fashion.
Logged
My Box: Phenom II 3.4GHz X4 | ASUS ATI RadeonHD 5770, 1GB GDDR5 RAM | 1x4GB DDR3 SRAM | Arch Linux, x86_64 (Cube) / Windows 7 x64 (Blob)
Quote from: Fede-lasse
Why do all the pro-Microsoft people have troll avatars? :(
Post made August 20, 2011, 01:36:23 AM was deleted at the author's request.
Offline (Male) Rusky
Reply #12 Posted on: August 20, 2011, 10:23:09 AM

Resident Troll
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 955
MSN Messenger - rpjohnst@gmail.com
View Profile WWW Email
CSS has already-existing specifications and parsers so I don't really see how that's a problem. Even if they don't reuse an existing one they still have a much better foundation than an ad-hoc mess. I wish more config formats were that way (*ahem* Apache, vim, everything).

A similar idea goes to JS. Relatively, it's a rather nice language that has extremely performant, existing runtimes. You just have to get past the juvenile 90s image of flashing HTML crap. Just because something came from the web doesn't make it a bad idea- for example, cloud syncing, standard protocols, markup for formatting, etc. are all good ideas that do well outside the web.

Yes, GNOME 2 is more configurable, but that's where I pretty much agree with you. Just give them time and they'll fix annoying bits like ctrl+del and give power users more control.
Logged
Offline (Male) Josh @ Dreamland
Reply #13 Posted on: August 20, 2011, 10:32:49 AM

Prince of all Goldfish
Developer
Location: Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2959

View Profile Email
Ugh. With exception of your hatred towards any non-commonplace syntax for even the most trivial uses, I can't find any content in this thread I'm comfortable trolling.

Everything you said about GTK3 was right. But GNOME 3's interface is horrible, no matter what else they improved. Maybe when Wayland comes in and I can actually use my graphics card at its full potential, it'll be worth it. Until then, they can keep their unusable fucking interface. I'd feel more empowered if their desktop panel was four terminal windows and a run dialog rather than icons to programs I usually press once at startup then never touch again.
Logged
"That is the single most cryptic piece of code I have ever seen." -Master PobbleWobble
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." -Evelyn Beatrice Hall, Friends of Voltaire
Pages: 1
  Print