Re: A call to drop gnome
Hi.
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 12:35:29PM +0000, Gian Uberto Lauri wrote:
> >>>>> "R" == Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> writes:
>
>
> R> As we saw two weeks ago, the decision to run GNOME on Wayland
> R> backfired at synaptic. To rephrase, why bother running X if there
> R> are no applications left to run on X?
>
> Because I like and I use a lot remote display. Because I prefer it
> user program.
So do I, occasionally. It's not a silver bullet, but does the job if the
target host two-three hops from you. Unless you're doing something
really strange like trying to watch the video via "ssh -X" (a hint -
don't).
> If you have only your machine, having or not having "network
> transparency" does not matter. If you live in a network, it matters.
And that's the thing. The network transparency some of us love and use
does not exist in Wayland.
They do offer some bastardized version of RDP, but it has no ability to
connect to an existing session, and there's nothing even remotely close
to my favorite "ssh -X".
> >> Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it.
>
> R> I recall hearing similar rhetoric 25 years ago. Some Operating
> R> System who's name starts with big W, and it had 4-color flag for
> R> logo. Some say that rise in popularity of said OS involved an
> R> unspecified amount of unconventional off-market negotiations and a
> R> bag of dirty tricks.
>
> And a band of rebels gathering around a penguin totem in the name of
> freedom.
>
> Gnome at least should not chain them in proprietary software.
I never said that members of GNOME project are Satan incarnates.
They write and distribute free (as in freedom) software. It's popular,
whenever it's due to the design or in spite of it.
What does ring some warning bells are methods (see above) that some of
those people utilize to gain that popularity, and a collateral damage to
non-GNOME software.
>
> R> The way things go right now with the GNOME all those impressive
> R> tricks will be obsolete. Unless, of course, some kind soul moves
> R> that "sway" thing from the experimental to sid. Because AFAIK
> R> there are only four "Wayland window managers" (it's techically
> R> incorrect to call them that, I know), and only two of them made
> R> into buster so far (GNOME's mutter and weston, the reference one).
>
> Add one more reason to use X.
My main reason to continue to use X in buster. I got used to my openbox
setup.
Reco
Reply to: