Gnome 2

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
40 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Gnome 2

Ilya Chernykh
Hi!

Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Malcolm-31
On Fri, 7 Oct 2011 19:43:50 +0400
Ilya Chernykh <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?
>
Why?

If your so keen, create your own OBS instance and build yourself?

To be honest, for the small investment of $$$ for SLED with just
updates, I can use a supported release of Gnome 2.x for more years to
come....

--
Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
openSUSE 11.4 (x86_64) Kernel 2.6.37.6-0.7-desktop
up 11 days 3:49, 3 users, load average: 0.67, 0.35, 0.28
GPU GeForce 8600 GTS Silent - Driver Version: 280.13


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar
In reply to this post by Ilya Chernykh
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 19:43 +0400, Ilya Chernykh wrote:
> Hi!
>
> Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?
>

You could try this yourself: create an own project, link all the
packages and have it build against Factory.

I did this now to get a first glimpse and the result can be seen at:
<a href="https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%">https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%
3AGS2.32

=> Now, is it worthy to invest time in this? If you feel like, you're
most welcome to do so. I'll gladly get you started in any way possible.

Once you have a branch that works fine we can consider merging this back
into G:S:2.32 for general use.

Have a lot of fun,
Dominique

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Ilya Chernykh
On Friday 07 October 2011 22:18:14 Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:

> > Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?
> >
>
> You could try this yourself: create an own project, link all the
> packages and have it build against Factory.
>
> I did this now to get a first glimpse and the result can be seen at:
> <a href="https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%">https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%
> 3AGS2.32
>
> => Now, is it worthy to invest time in this? If you feel like, you're
> most welcome to do so. I'll gladly get you started in any way possible.

Let's wait and see how much will rebuild.

> Once you have a branch that works fine we can consider merging this back
> into G:S:2.32 for general use.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar
On Fri, 2011-10-07 at 23:06 +0400, Ilya Chernykh wrote:

> On Friday 07 October 2011 22:18:14 Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
>
> > > Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?
> > >
> >
> > You could try this yourself: create an own project, link all the
> > packages and have it build against Factory.
> >
> > I did this now to get a first glimpse and the result can be seen at:
> > <a href="https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%">https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%
> > 3AGS2.32
> >
> > => Now, is it worthy to invest time in this? If you feel like, you're
> > most welcome to do so. I'll gladly get you started in any way possible.
>
> Let's wait and see how much will rebuild.
>
> > Once you have a branch that works fine we can consider merging this back
> > into G:S:2.32 for general use.
>

succeeded: 58 failed: 75 unresolvable: 70
Feel free to work on that one! If you want you can branch an own prj or,
to save build power, I could also grant you rights on my branch directly
(then all the failures and succeeds are already there at least).

Have a lot of fun!

Dominique


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Vincent Untz-5
In reply to this post by Ilya Chernykh
Le vendredi 07 octobre 2011, à 19:43 +0400, Ilya Chernykh a écrit :
> Hi!
>
> Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?

Just wondering: why would you want that? If you're interested in having
a GNOME 2 look and feel in Factory, then look at the fallback mode in
GNOME 3 -- it's a good start, and only needs some little bits to be
really nice.

(this was mentioned several times in the past, fwiw)

Vincent

--
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Ilya Chernykh
In reply to this post by Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar
On Monday 10 October 2011 11:20:56 Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:

> > > > Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?
> > > >
> > >
> > > You could try this yourself: create an own project, link all the
> > > packages and have it build against Factory.
> > >
> > > I did this now to get a first glimpse and the result can be seen at:
> > > <a href="https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%">https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%
> > > 3AGS2.32
> > >
> > > => Now, is it worthy to invest time in this? If you feel like, you're
> > > most welcome to do so. I'll gladly get you started in any way possible.
> >
> > Let's wait and see how much will rebuild.
> >
> > > Once you have a branch that works fine we can consider merging this back
> > > into G:S:2.32 for general use.
> >
>
> succeeded: 58 failed: 75 unresolvable: 70

I looked through the errors and many of them are easily solvable such as
"Requires: licenses" and the kind. The unresolvable packages
are just those dependent on filed ones.

> Feel free to work on that one! If you want you can branch an own prj or,
> to save build power, I could also grant you rights on my branch directly
> (then all the failures and succeeds are already there at least).
>
> Have a lot of fun!



--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Ilya Chernykh
In reply to this post by Vincent Untz-5
On Monday 10 October 2011 11:24:00 Vincent Untz wrote:

> > Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?
>
> Just wondering: why would you want that? If you're interested in having
> a GNOME 2 look and feel in Factory, then look at the fallback mode in
> GNOME 3 -- it's a good start, and only needs some little bits to be
> really nice.
>
> (this was mentioned several times in the past, fwiw)

Look, Vincent, there was even Gnome 2.30 for those who prefer it to 2.32
and Gnome 2.30 for those who prefer it to Gnome 2.30. I think the change
from 2.32 to 3.0 is much greater.

Regarding fallback, I did not try this, but I was told
that QtCurve will not work with it as well as gtk-qt-engine. Also I was told anecdotes
that it has the clock exactly in the center without ability to move it and other curious stories.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar
In reply to this post by Ilya Chernykh
On Mon, 2011-10-10 at 13:21 +0400, Ilya Chernykh wrote:

> On Monday 10 October 2011 11:20:56 Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger wrote:
>
> > > > > Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > You could try this yourself: create an own project, link all the
> > > > packages and have it build against Factory.
> > > >
> > > > I did this now to get a first glimpse and the result can be seen at:
> > > > <a href="https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%">https://build.opensuse.org/project/monitor?project=home%3Adimstar%
> > > > 3AGS2.32
> > > >
> > > > => Now, is it worthy to invest time in this? If you feel like, you're
> > > > most welcome to do so. I'll gladly get you started in any way possible.
> > >
> > > Let's wait and see how much will rebuild.
> > >
> > > > Once you have a branch that works fine we can consider merging this back
> > > > into G:S:2.32 for general use.
> > >
> >
> > succeeded: 58 failed: 75 unresolvable: 70
>
> I looked through the errors and many of them are easily solvable such as
> "Requires: licenses" and the kind. The unresolvable packages
> are just those dependent on filed ones.

As said: feel free to work on this. I have limited time capacity and
will not invest more time on this. My primary goal for openSUSE is to
have a stable support for GNOME 3.2 in 12.1.

Dominique

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Vincent Untz-5
In reply to this post by Ilya Chernykh
Le lundi 10 octobre 2011, à 13:24 +0400, Ilya Chernykh a écrit :

> On Monday 10 October 2011 11:24:00 Vincent Untz wrote:
>
> > > Can we see if GNOME:STABLE:2.32 builds well for Factory?
> >
> > Just wondering: why would you want that? If you're interested in having
> > a GNOME 2 look and feel in Factory, then look at the fallback mode in
> > GNOME 3 -- it's a good start, and only needs some little bits to be
> > really nice.
> >
> > (this was mentioned several times in the past, fwiw)
>
> Look, Vincent, there was even Gnome 2.30 for those who prefer it to 2.32
> and Gnome 2.30 for those who prefer it to Gnome 2.30. I think the change
> from 2.32 to 3.0 is much greater.

I think you misunderstood how we use GNOME:STABLE:*: we never had
GNOME:STABLE:2.30 as a way to downgrade from 2.32; it was available for
11.3 so that 11.3 users could enjoy the latest GNOME 2.30.x releases
(instead of staying with GNOME 2.30.0 that was in 11.3).

We also made GNOME:STABLE:2.32 so that 11.3 users could have GNOME 2.32
if they wanted to upgrade from 2.30.

Basically, we never allowed users to downgrade GNOME through those
repos.

> Regarding fallback, I did not try this, but I was told
> that QtCurve will not work with it as well as gtk-qt-engine. Also I was told anecdotes
> that it has the clock exactly in the center without ability to move it and other curious stories.

You can move the clock, and I'd be happy to hear the other curious
stories -- a lot of them are unfortunately misinformed.

However, the QtCurve/gtk-qt-engine issue might be real, indeed. But I
don't think this issue alone is worth the effort maintaining GNOME 2.x
for openSUSE, while upstream stopped maintaining it and everybody has
moved on.

This is just my opinion, of course, and everybody is free to do that --
it's free software, after all.

Cheers,

Vincent

--
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

C-29
In reply to this post by Dominique Leuenberger / DimStar
On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 11:27, Dimstar / Dominique Leuenberger
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> As said: feel free to work on this. I have limited time capacity and
> will not invest more time on this. My primary goal for openSUSE is to
> have a stable support for GNOME 3.2 in 12.1.

Which is as it should be.

The core of openSUSE supports and provides the current/leading
versions of the applications.  If community members want to stay with
older versions of software, then they can step up, use the openSUSE
Build service and create a Community repo.  KDE3 is an example of
this.  Gnome2 has to be the same.  Gnome3 is the here and now and what
we (as a project) should ship as part of the next release... if a
small group of Gnome users want to stick with the old software, then
they can, but they must support it themselves.

The harsh reality is that like KDE3, Gnome2 is not maintained upstream
anymore. The beauty of the openSUSE Build system is... if you want to
stick with older obsolete software, you can :-) but you have to
maintain it yourself.

C.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Ilya Chernykh
On Monday 10 October 2011 13:35:59 C wrote:

> > As said: feel free to work on this. I have limited time capacity and
> > will not invest more time on this. My primary goal for openSUSE is to
> > have a stable support for GNOME 3.2 in 12.1.
>
> Which is as it should be.
>
> The core of openSUSE supports and provides the current/leading
> versions of the applications.  If community members want to stay with
> older versions of software, then they can step up, use the openSUSE
> Build service and create a Community repo.  KDE3 is an example of
> this.  Gnome2 has to be the same.  Gnome3 is the here and now and what
> we (as a project) should ship as part of the next release... if a
> small group of Gnome users want to stick with the old software, then
> they can, but they must support it themselves.

> The harsh reality is that like KDE3, Gnome2 is not maintained upstream
> anymore. The beauty of the openSUSE Build system is... if you want to
> stick with older obsolete software, you can :-) but you have to
> maintain it yourself.

I think providing it for openSUSE is much easier than for other distributions exactly
thanks to OBS.

I also recall a topic on the openSUSE forum from April where people were asked
whether they want Gnome2 in 12.1 or not. The poll ended even, although I suspect
the majority of the voters did not use Gnome at all and just feared that this will take developer's
power from KDE or other software.

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Rajko M.
On Monday, October 10, 2011 04:51:37 AM Ilya Chernykh wrote:

> I also recall a topic on the openSUSE forum from April where people were
> asked whether they want Gnome2 in 12.1 or not. The poll ended even,

I bet that poll didn't ask responders to take maintenance of Gnome2, which
will give very few answers, if any :)

It is easy to wish something that cost you no more then to say "yes".
People like you that take time to make things happen are not that easy to
find.

> although I suspect the majority of the voters did not use Gnome at all and
> just feared that this will take developer's power from KDE or other
> software.

Fear that development power can be moved from KDE to use for Gnome is kind of
funny. Development is not car driving, so you just sit, check commands in few
minutes and you can go :)

--
Regards,
Rajko
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Ilya Chernykh
On Tuesday 11 October 2011 04:42:16 Rajko M. wrote:

> > I also recall a topic on the openSUSE forum from April where people were
> > asked whether they want Gnome2 in 12.1 or not. The poll ended even,
>
> I bet that poll didn't ask responders to take maintenance of Gnome2, which
> will give very few answers, if any :)

The poll was by developers who asked users.
 
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Stefan Seyfried
In reply to this post by Vincent Untz-5
On 10.10.2011 11:31, Vincent Untz wrote:

> You can move the clock, and I'd be happy to hear the other curious
> stories -- a lot of them are unfortunately misinformed.

* you cannot move the panel to the left or right edge
* you cannot disable the top (or bottom) panel
* you cannot change the insanely big height of the panel

Nothing I had tried for myself, but 3 of the curious stories :-)


seife
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Vincent Untz-5
Le mercredi 12 octobre 2011, à 19:28 +0200, Stefan Seyfried a écrit :
> On 10.10.2011 11:31, Vincent Untz wrote:
>
> > You can move the clock, and I'd be happy to hear the other curious
> > stories -- a lot of them are unfortunately misinformed.
>
> * you cannot move the panel to the left or right edge
> * you cannot disable the top (or bottom) panel

Press alt when right-clicking. There you go.

> * you cannot change the insanely big height of the panel

The height depends on the font size (make your font smaller in
gnome-tweak-tool) and your theme (unlucky, we don't ship any other theme
right now for GTK+ 3).

Vincent

--
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Ilya Chernykh
In reply to this post by Vincent Untz-5
On Monday 10 October 2011 13:31:32 Vincent Untz wrote:

> You can move the clock, and I'd be happy to hear the other curious
> stories -- a lot of them are unfortunately misinformed.

There are reports that under Ubuntu 11.10 there is no layout switcher under fallback mode.

https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-session/+bug/846253

Does this affect openSUSE?

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Vincent Untz-5
Le jeudi 13 octobre 2011, à 18:18 +0400, Ilya Chernykh a écrit :

> On Monday 10 October 2011 13:31:32 Vincent Untz wrote:
>
> > You can move the clock, and I'd be happy to hear the other curious
> > stories -- a lot of them are unfortunately misinformed.
>
> There are reports that under Ubuntu 11.10 there is no layout switcher under fallback mode.
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-session/+bug/846253
>
> Does this affect openSUSE?

No. If you have more than one layout, you automatically get a layout
switcher.

Vincent

--
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Ilya Chernykh
On Thursday 13 October 2011 19:03:13 Vincent Untz wrote:

> > There are reports that under Ubuntu 11.10 there is no layout switcher under fallback mode.
> >
> > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-session/+bug/846253
> >
> > Does this affect openSUSE?
>
> No. If you have more than one layout, you automatically get a layout
> switcher.

Also people say Nautilus was raped and tortured in Gnome-3.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Gnome 2

Vincent Untz-5
Le jeudi 13 octobre 2011, à 21:59 +0400, Ilya Chernykh a écrit :

> On Thursday 13 October 2011 19:03:13 Vincent Untz wrote:
>
> > > There are reports that under Ubuntu 11.10 there is no layout switcher under fallback mode.
> > >
> > > https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/gnome-session/+bug/846253
> > >
> > > Does this affect openSUSE?
> >
> > No. If you have more than one layout, you automatically get a layout
> > switcher.
>
> Also people say Nautilus was raped and tortured in Gnome-3.

Do you have any first-hand experience with GNOME 3 and the fallback
mode, and therefore issues you can raise? I don't think it's productive
to discuss hearsays...

Vincent

--
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
To contact the owner, e-mail: [hidden email]

12