Re: galeon (not) in Debian stable
<quote who="Sebastien Bacher">
> I agree with Sven, after reading archives of gnome mailing-lists no
> technical reason to choose epiphany .. just some devels that like it more.
Read the r-t final modules analysis (and preferably the discussion leading
up to it). Epiphany makes more sense within the context of GNOME, and there
didn't seem to be any interest from the Galeon guys to include Galeon.
(Note that I am in a very small minority when it comes to this decision: I
didn't think we should ship either, and yet I do think that we need to
include a browser in our Desktop release.)
> > Despite some disagreement with specific choices that the Epiphany team have
> > made, it is the right choice.
>
> I don't think so. But it seems that for gnome people the few features an
> app has, the better it is. You're choosing to kick all the options that
> made the goodness of apps to have simple apps for beginners ... not
> the good alternative in my mind.
That's not a fair or even accurate analysis of our goals.
> Last time I've tested epiphany (one week ago) I've found the bookmarks
> toolbars very poor compared to galeon one :
> - no simple way to edit it .. you've to go in bookmark, search your
> entry, etc ... In the galeon one, just right click on it.
> - no way to add an icon
> - no way to specify text entry wide
>
> I've asked about that on #epiphany on the gnome's irc, the bookmarks
> toolbar is not going to be changed, devels think that's is good enough
> like that.
Unfortunately, the bookmarks stuff in Epiphany is kind of dramatically
different to other browsers, and it will take some time to get this as
polished as it should be (in terms of behaviour, not "features"). Some
things will change, some won't.
Everyone has their favourite little featurelets. Some will arrive, some
won't. Get in there and make a pitch about why they have a positive impact
on the behaviour of the browser. Don't say "oh oh, you killed my feature!"
because that doesn't really matter in the big picture.
"Free software maintenance: Adding Features"
or, "Why Developers are so Stubborn"
http://www106.pair.com/rhp/features.html
> Many people don't like your choice, people who use GNU/Linux for some
> times and used to have power apps with greats options. But perhaps your
> goal is to do a big, simple, featureless system for people that used to
> run windows ?
Again, this is an unfair and innaccurate analysis. Remember, you are smart
enough to choose your own browser, and if that's the case, you're not really
in any of the highest priority target user categories. Don't be offended by
that, it's not your fault, and it's not a matter of criticism from any of
the developers involved in GNOME. It's merely a matter of world domination,
and winning you over is less important than some other target groups. You
are, in a sense, already won.
> > Right now, I still use Galeon. But it's becoming very clear that Epiphany is
> > (faster|better|stabler|etc), and that at some stage, I should shift.
>
> But Epiphany is featureless ...
And yet, it still manages to open web pages, save bookmarks, and all manner
of useful things that you'd expect of a web browser. Does it need to provide
icons down the left hand side of its preferences box to be a web browser?
Does it need to have context menus on its toolbar to be a web browser? Hmmm,
no it doesn't. :-)
But wow! It sure does do this browsing stuff!
- Jeff
--
linux.conf.au 2004: Adelaide, Australia http://lca2004.linux.org.au/
"You gotta know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to
walk away, and know when to run." - Kenny Rogers, The Gambler
Reply to: