Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
- Not having a desktop where customization and completely stupid
ideas. (gss and nautilus browsing behavior) are pushed into the
desktop to spite user feedback to the contrary. (GNOME)
What does this have to do with a everything installation?. If you have
request for enhancements to gss and nautilus browsing behavior, file them
Nothing directly, I believe the fact that the removing the ability for
someone to have a choice to install everything if they desired to is the
connection to gss and nautilus. The connection is why are we making
software? Is it for the developers or for the users? Is there any way to
come to a middle ground where both perspectives merge?
Some of the latest changes comparatively resemble going into someone's
house and they have music that you dislike. you might ask them if they
could change the selection. They respond back with it is my house, radio
or a similar comparison. Of course one either departs or argues a bit more.
Basically, a compromise should make and questions should be proposed as
to how a common resolution can be met middle ground.
Sorry, my thought process for grouping concepts.
Metacity even cut out the windows managing feature. This is base for
what the program is supposed to accomplish in the first place.
Simplicity is not the answer.
Not sure what you refer to as the windows managing feature. Last time I
checked they were moving towards the direction of adding more window
management option with features like edge resistance. Again unsure how
this relates to everything installation.
I believe the fact that metacity does not currently work and did work
slightly before an upgrade with test 3 and its "stabilization" phase
brought out issues with metacity comparative to previous desktop
managers like enlightenment and other capable managers used throughout
at least RHL 5.2 history.
Upstream co-operation with project goals and usability and
customizability are better served with divergence from upstream.
Diverging from upstream solution is a long term maintenance issue. We
need to be careful about that.
It is becoming obvious that making a system which is limited in
functionality or reduced user configurability is not possible with
upstream adherence and reduced patches. Programs cannot solely rely on
the fact that the upstream developer does not want to add capabilities
for a program to be able to cope with performing an install everything
selection or for a program to install whatever it can resolve program
requirements with and report on what programs were not unpalatable
because of dep issues. Yum is the Fedora installers main resolution
device and it should be patched regardless of upstream arguments. If the
end user is limited from functionality, departure from upstream and
customization of a program should be applied. If maintenance becomes an
issue and divergence is too great, it is now another program with more
desired features.
If yum is holding back the possibility to do an everything install, fix
it. If GNOME is getting a lot of people upset with tactics and deletion
of features without regard for user concerns, diverge, patch, eliminate
crappy integrated programs, add missing capabilities to the programs/suites.
Jim
--
fedora-test-list mailing list
fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list