Excerpts from William Jon McCann's message of vie dic 24 00:32:40 +0100 2010: > Hi Carlos, Hi, > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Carlos Garcia Campos > <carlosgc gnome org> wrote: > > Excerpts from Frederic Peters's message of jue dic 23 10:22:40 +0100 2010: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Sergey Udaltsov wrote: > >> > I am confused, what's the story with gnome-panel and gnome-applets in > >> > 3.0? Are they in, are they out? If gnome 3 is to support gnome2 compat > >> > mode, both of these components should stay in for some while, right? > >> > Currently, the situation in in jhbuild is very strange: gnome-panel is > >> > still there, gnome-applets are gone. Is this planned? Who'd need the > >> > panel without the applets? > >> > >> I pointed this after the new modulesets were pushed, you can read the > >> answer Jon gave here: > >> http://mail.gnome.org/archives/release-team/2010-December/msg00004.html > >> > >> The relevant part: > >> > >> | >> - gnome-applets (even if we still have gnome-panel) > >> | > >> | RIP. Essential applets should be part of gnome-panel itself. It > >> | doesn't make sense to have applets only in the gnome 2 fallback > >> | experience. > > > > I disagree. If I run gnome-session with the classic mode I expect to > > see exactly what I have right now, with all the applets. The > > definition of essential applet is probably different for every user. > > GNOME 2 fallback experience should be gnome-panel, metacity and > > gnome-applets. > > It is important to note that there is no such "classic mode". There > is a fallback mode for when 3D support is not available. Then this is confusing: http://git.gnome.org/browse/gnome-session/tree/data/classic-gnome.session.desktop.in.in note that to run the fallback you need something like $ gnome-session --session classic-gnome so I would suggest to rename it to fallback or whatever to avoid confusions, since what I expect from a classic session is what we have been using for years. > The fact > that it will use some of the GNOME 2 components is mostly an > implementation detail - it is way more efficient than building > something else. (That said, I think someone could hack up a simple > panel + system status equivalent in javascript in no more than a few > weeks if they wanted to. And I think that would actually be > preferable for a number of reasons.) > > There is no "I want a new GNOME but not GNOME 3 mode." There aren't > two GNOMEs - only the one we barely have enough help designing, > building, and testing already. If you want your system to be exactly > as it is now my recommendation would be to leave it just as it is > now. It's not a problem of what users want, many people want gnome 3 but they can't run the shell because of the 3D support. What I meant was that if I can't run gnome-shell (even if I wanted) I expect the fallback mode to be what I had in gnome 2, because otherwhise gnome 3 will be a regression for non 3D users. > It doesn't make any sense for the user to have an entirely different > concept in the fallback that isn't available in the default. Nor does > it make any sense for us to provide a developer API and add-on system > that only works in the fallback mode. gnome-panel is already an entirely different concept, that's why I don't see the problem of leaving the applets too. > GNOME 3 is a change. Both the default and the fallback modes will be > different from GNOME 2. We can't and shouldn't shy away from that. I don't know if there are plans to work on gnome-panel for gnome 3, but in this moment the panel is exactly the same, or even worse since it doesn't even work with gtk3. > People who don't desire such changes are not obligated to make them. > I agree, note that I'm thinking of people who can't use the shell (and fortunately I'm not one of those anymore, since I bought a new laptop recently and I took care of buying it with an intel video card to make sure I'll be able to use gnome3 with gnome-shell) Regards, -- Carlos Garcia Campos PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x523E6462
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature