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

Re: Whats missing from Gnome3

Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> I still can restore the last GNOME 2 version of testing from a backup
> and lock the GNOME 2 packages. There's no need to use the outdated
> stable.
> For sure, using testing does mean that it's wise to backup, before doing
> risky upgrades.

While that is possible it will be setting yourself up for quite a
complicated job to sort out security upgrades that you need from
upgrades that you won't want.  And it will just keep going without an
end in sight.

> GNOME 3 anyway isn't ok at the moment, so it's not about using testing,
> but about a dropped GNOME 2 that is stable.
> "But it is really bad that GNOME burned the bridge down first before
> having created the new one."
> Why should we switch the DE? Why shouldn't we fight to get back GNOME 2
> if we prefer this? If most people prefer GNOME 3 it would be ok. But
> seemingly there are more voices that don't like GNOME 3.

*I* am not suggesting that you need to switch desktop environments.  I
have been running fvwm for a very long time just for that reason that
I don't like the thrash.  (But I support people that run GNOME and so
am affected by the GNOME changes just the same as everyone else.)

The KDE users just went through this and KDE Trinity was the result.
Maybe GNOME users should decide to do the same thing and jump straight
to it.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: