[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Reverting to GNOME for jessie's default desktop

Jordi Mallach wrote:
> Accessibility

> Hardware: GNOME 3.12 will be one of the few desktop environments to support
> HiDPI displays, now very common on some laptop models. Lack of support for
> HiDPI means non-technical users will get an unreadable desktop by default, and
> no hints on how to fix that.

I think the above are fairly big points. 

It would be helpful to see a pointer to a bug report about how xfce
fails when the DPI is higher than usual. (Also, perhaps worth noting
that 3.12 is quite a few versions ahead of the gnome currently in

Another one I've become aware of, but not investigated is that xfce's
compositor may not do as good a job at eliminating tearing (with eg,
Intel graphics) as gnome's does. (Also, I think xfce doesn't enable
compositing by default.) Further investigation of this would be appreciated.

> Popularity: One of the metrics discussed by the tasksel change proponents
> mentioned popcon numbers. 8 months after the desktop change, Xfce does not seem
> to have made a dent on install numbers.

fwiw https://qa.debian.org/popcon-graph.php?packages=task-gnome-desktop+task-xfce-desktop+gnome+xfce4&show_installed=on&want_legend=on&want_ticks=on&from_date=&to_date=&hlght_date=2014-01-25&date_fmt=%25Y-%25m&beenhere=1

> systemd embracing: One of the reasons to switch to Xfce was that it didn’t
> depend on systemd. But now that systemd is the default, that shouldn’t be a
> problem. Also given ConsoleKit is deprecated and dead upstream, KDE and Xfce
> are switching or are planning to switch to systemd/logind.

systemd did not much affect the switch to xfce.

OTOH, double-suspend bugs still being open is a problem. #727605

> Downstream health
> Upstream health
> Community
> Security
> Privacy
> Documentation

I don't think these are very useful criteria, unless they lead to
actual technical issues/benefits. Which can then be discussed on
technical and/or quantified grounds rather than advocacy grounds.

> Localization

I'm wary of comparing translation percentages since that hides a lot of
relevant details. It's better to look at how well a given translation
performs in regular usage.

Another thing that makes comparing localization numbers work better is
to scale them by native speaker populations.

Perhaps bubulle could do a more detailed analysis?

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: