On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:12 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 23:24 +0100, drago01 wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 10:34 PM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 17:19 -0400, Ray Strode wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> > Well, it's less Fedora-y in that we used to have this kind of >> >> > conception >> >> > where there were desktop environments, controlled by the desktop >> >> > team. >> >> Fedora desktop team has only ever controlled the desktop spin, which uses GNOME. >> >> Other SIGs have controlled other desktops since there have been spins. >> >> >> >> > Then the login manager, system config tools, and probably some other >> >> > stuff I'm not thinking of were controlled more or less by the >> >> > distribution. >> >> what do you mean by "the distribution" ? We all work on the distribution right? >> > >> > Well sure, but we kinda felt a project wide responsibility that those >> > tools should work, because they were Our Tools For Making Stuff Work. >> > >> > Now no-one really works on a lot of the s-c* tools, partly because >> > 'GNOME replaced them'. >> >> Well it seems that nobody cares enough to do that work. So either it >> is not that important for the other desktop environments (user prefer >> to do do the configuration using other tools / text editors) or there >> is simply no one that cares enough *and* has the ability to step and >> do the work. > > Well, sure, but I don't place much faith in this exact formulation of > this common argument. 'Caring' isn't something that just magically > Happens or Doesn't Happen. It's not like anyone was maintaining s-c-* > before because it was a bundle of fun, they were maintaining them > because they were the Fedora system configuration tools. And, bluntly, > RH was paying most of them. But now RH's paid resources and most of the > 'we care because they're our most prominent configuration tools' > resources get re-directed into working on the GNOME tools, to the > detriment of the desktop-agnostic tools. So RH cared and payed for the maintenance now RH no longer cares .... (you get the pattern) >> Configuration tools that are part of and integrated into >> the desktop do offer a better and consistent user experience, > > They offer a better and more consistent user experience *for users who > use that desktop and only that desktop*. They offer a less consistent > user experience for users who use multiple desktops, and they offer > nothing at all for users who don't use that desktop. Yeah so the goal would be to have such tools integrated in every desktop (upstream!) ... yes we are not their yet and probably should add something as a stop gap solution but the end goal for each desktop should be to provide a consistent and integrated UX and not a mixture of random tools that do not fit at all. -- desktop mailing list desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop
