On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 03:22 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 08/27/2009 02:13 AM, Matthias Clasen wrote: > > > > > We have not just removed irrelevant crap from the appearance capplet to > > make room for more.... > > > This switching mechanism is temporary to facilitate trying out the shell > > while it is in beta. It will go away when the shell becomes the primary > > interface. > > Considering that it serves a useful purpose even if it temporary and itt > is not irrelevant crap, it seems it would have fit into the appearance > capplet rather than as a separate preferences menu item. It wouldn't > bother me much if not for the fact that there is no categorization by > default and it is long enough not to fit into my screen completely. > That is a very visible item that needs improvement but I suppose the > development is focused on GNOME Shell instead. "Instead" here isn't really an appropriate characterization. It all fits together. In gnome-shell, you have two options for preferences: - they show up when searching - you can get to the "gnome-control-center" shell under the user status menu. We might not eventually be using something different from the current gnome-control-center, but the basic plan will be along those lines. > > Also, if you use the switch you are complaining about, your menu > > problems will be solved by way of the shell not having menus :-) > > I am not complaining about the switch itself but the placement of it. > Using it btw just gives me a blank desktop and all I can is the desktop > background and I have to restart X to get my session back. However > gnome-shell --replace on the command line works Does it fix itself if you wait long enough for desktop-effects to time out? (I think it's 35 seconds or so now ... give it a minute.) Can you file a bug about this against desktop-effects in Red Hat bugzilla (include information about your video card.). I don't have many immediate ideas why this could be happening, since all desktop-effects does is run 'gnome-shell --replace' but it definitely needs to be investigated. > and the shell still has menus in the side bar even though it seems > to missing many application entries. The missing applications was fixed shortly after 2.27.0 release; I'm really hoping to get through everything and have updated gnome-shell packages tomorrow. > I worked with the shell for a few days, the parts that work are > very well done but there are still some obvious problems that make it > hard to use it on a more permanent basis. I will keep a tab on it and > write up the details if the issues I see linger. I understood from the > comments on IRC in response to my post in fedora-test list about GNOME > shell that you aren't keen to take bug reports just yet. We certainly welcome bug reports, but: - For stuff that isn't packaging, we'd prefer upstream bug reports: if the reporter files the bug upstream themselves, they can check if it's a duplicate see previous discussion, get updates when it is fixed, etc. Which is not available if we are upstreaming the bug reports ourselves. - It's not too useful to have bug reports on 3 week old packages; I'm shooting for weekly releases, though so far I haven't come close to that. - Owen -- Fedora-desktop-list mailing list Fedora-desktop-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-desktop-list