Re: Sarge troubles...
On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 05:14, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-02-12 at 01:01, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> > * GNOME 2 is less configurable with regard to window managers
> > (must force the change by killing one WM and starting
> > another),
>
> IIRC, there is a protocol defined in the enhanced Window Manager
> specification for switching WMs. Metacity implements this, so running
> "metacity --replace" will tell the existing WM to exit and metacity will
> replace it.
>
> The explicit WM selection was removed as it is not exactly a popular
> option, and if you know what a WM is you have the knowledge to kill one
> and start another. Or in Debian, just change the alternative.
Okay, fair enough. :-)
> > and it seems, with regard to the background (no
> > option leave it alone and let E manage the background as GNOME
> > 1 could -- oh wait, here's something in gconf which might do
> > it, if I can make gconf prefs stick when I log out...).
>
> The option *is* the GConf key, its just not exposed in the UI.
Hmm, but it doesn't work. I use Configuration Editor to turn it off,
quit the Editor, restart it, and it's still off; but when I log out and
back in, it's back on again!
> > * GNOME 2 is inconsistently configurable with regard to
> > preferred applications, where on the one hand it lets the user
> > choose a text editor and web browser, but on the other hand,
> > has these misleading generic names in the menu -- names which
> > are identical to those in preferences but are not configured
> > by them.
>
> The Preferred Applications dialog is known to be poor.
> Accessories->Text Editor is the text editor which is part of the GNOME
> Desktop release, aka gedit. Internet -> Web Browser is the web browser
> which is part of the GNOME Desktop release, aka Epiphany. If you
> install others, they are named. This way if the user just has the core
> GNOME Desktop release, they have a "text editor" and a "web browser" and
> don't have to wonder what "epiphany" and "gedit" is.
Okay, then as a minimum, either the menu entry or the application
preference should be renamed to avoid confusion.
Ideally, the menu should intelligently update these things
automatically. For example, it could have a list of "Text Editor"
programs, and if one is installed, then rename it to "Text Editor" in
the menu, and have the other names exposed. Then when one edits the
"Text Editor" preference, then that menu entry should point to their new
choice (say, gvim), then gedit should be exposed as "gedit". This would
satisfy the newbies, allow the moderately clueful to configure it, and
also not put obnoxious "Text Editor" and "Web Browser" generic entries
for GNOME apps in the KDE menus (on those systems/networks with both)...
I'll wishlist this upstream if it makes sense (if there are no further
comments).
> > * GNOME 2 no longer has a user menu, or menu editor.
>
> As said, use nautilus and go to applications:///
Cool, thanks!
> > * Upstream GNOME 2 Palm Pilot synchronization is seriously
> > broken (for those of us who need memo-file), and it's not
> > clear Debian's is fixed (and I don't want to risk my Pilot's
> > data finding out).
>
> gnome-pilot is not maintained as far as I can tell.
Not maintained? It's maintained upstream, though with a slow release
cycle (I'm on the gnome-pilot list). Or do you mean that the Debian
maintainer is not actively keeping up the package?
> > * A few applications are still not stable for GNOME 2, such as
> > galeon and gnucash, and evolution is not yet in testing.
>
> gnucash doesn't exist for GNOME 2, but I find Galeon perfectly stable.
GnuCash for GNOME 2 is on the way (or at least planned), as mentioned on
the website. As for Galeon, my experience isn't quite as bad as the LWN
editors (see today's edition, if you're subscribed), but the memory
bloat and feature retreat are real issues. Then again, that's why it's
an "unstable" 1.3 release. :-)
> > For these last three reasons, I think GNOME 2 is not yet ready for my
> > group. For the first three reasons, I must say I'm disappointed in the
> > upstream design decisions which reduce configurability, but am willing
> > to work around them.
>
> The GNOME team have heard this many, many, many times. Explain what
> options you are missing, and why you need them so much, and they might
> be added again. The majority of people end up requesting totally odd
> features, or can't actually give any.
Okay, will do.
> > Make an emacs(21) .desktop entry (likely from the .menu entry) and
> > contribute it to the Debian packager in a wishlist bug report. (GNOME 1
> > had this in gnome-panel-data, but I can see how it's more appropriate to
> > put into the emacs package itself.)
>
> I should do this for xemacs, I'm sure I've had one in the past...
Okay, I'll do a candidate emacs21 entry, and we can compare notes.
Thanks,
--
-Adam P.
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe!
http://lyre.mit.edu/~powell/The_Best_Stuff_In_The_World_Today_Cafe.ogg
Reply to: