On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:26:33 -0500 "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It still amazes me how people will take the position that all > associated with Gnome must be 'crap'. No don't get me wrong, I have > no arguments with your basic complaint that unnecessary dependencies > need not be included with the gstreamer packages. In fact, I agree. > > However, that notwithstanding, the general premise asserted > in the comment "GNOME crap" is just flat wrong. Now I was a KDE guy, > did a lot of beta work with KDE4 and also enjoy enlightenment, the > 'boxtops', windowmaker and recently Gnome. From first-hand > experience, I can tell you gnome is not crap. It is a solid desktop > built on the metacity wm that does a great many things right and a > handful of things I would do differently if I wrote desktops and > wm's, but on balance is an excellent desktop. > > Not to mention, it is just down right gorgeous: > > (152k) > http://www.3111skyline.com/dl/img/ss/gnome/BlueNightII.scaled.jpg > > Oh well, at least the gstreamer packages stripped of > unnecessary dependencies will be a great addition to AUR. Thank you > for that. But no need to deride a desktop just because whoever > packaged it last included a few unneeded dependencies :p > > Yes it was an unfortunate choice of words. I don't think GNOME is crap, I'm just not enamoured with the direction it seems to be headed in, i.e. GNOME Shell. I can do without shiny stuff like that. Previous to my switching to XFCE I was a GNOME user for a very long time. I reckon GNOME 3.0 will be just as much of a PR nightmare as KDE4 was and continues to be. It frustrates me that core technologies can depend on a long list of dependencies for another desktop environment. Try installing gstreamer0.10-plugins-good if you're not running GNOME and you'll see what I mean. Ananda
