Behind Canonical’s Curtain | LINUX Unplugged 234

Video is ready, Click Here to View ×


How does a SNAP really get created & why would companies like Microsoft, JetBrains & Plex want to be involved? We’re live from Canonical’s Seattle Snapcraft Summit with the inside scoop of where things are going.

Plus the major concerns we have about the future of Gnome Shell, why the Client Side Decoration debate is hot again & how Wayland is putting pressure on all the things.

Show Notes & Download:

Support Jupiter Broadcasting on Patreon ————-…

2 Comments

  1. Tilix is default on Ubuntu-budgie (17.10). And whilst I am here, Ubuntu-budgie is one of the very few distros I have tried that installs flawlessly without futzing with kernel boot parameters on a 2012 Macbook Pro: touchpad, media keys, libre video drivers, bootooth and wireless. Now when Budgie moves over to Qt…

  2. I have some opinions about the gnome CSD situation:

    1. you say it can't be about not using extensions, that's a principle discussion, for a decision what you install at the moment, such a moral stance does not matter.

    So if you have at the moment to decide, either no extensions and no crashes or using extensions and have crashes, do you really prefer the crashes over loosing your extensions? And I wonder if you really would prefer the crashes over having no extensions? I would not!

    2. if it crashes on you without extensions, I wonder either they made gnome really unstable, what I can't belief or its like it was, it never crashes, I sound maybe strange but I used it for years and it NEVER crashed once, not that any other desktop ever crashed on me in recent years.

    I mean I had crashes of the operating system cause I was to lazy to setup a swap space but not because of the UI. I mean its maybe different if you use proprietary graphic drivers.

    3. yes firefox plugins lead to big problems in firefox too, of course crashing firefox is not as bad as crashing the whole desktop but using extensions from random people on the internet, automatically can lead to instability.

    And there is a point between not using extensions at all and use everything, maybe deactivating a few and if it gets more stable you find out which one causes the problems and stop using that.

    So 1. be conservative with plugins use as few as possible, that's true for browsers too. 2. if you get problems find out which one causing the problems. It just sounds that gnome is unstable per se while its only unstable on your setup with your extensions.

    Other desktops took a easy route, they just don't give you the option to install plugins/extensions and then you have no stability problems.

    So lets compare it with unity, they had their desktop you take it how it is or not, if you did not like some aspects of it, you are just fucked. yes you can say they give you maybe a bit more customization options over gnome but on the unity side not so much. And they don't forbid you to use something else.

    So they decided to have good defaults over customization, that does not work for everybody but it works better than kde where you have to invest 10 hours configuring to have anything usable. That's why most people prefer gnome over kde.

    I don't even know what you are talking about with maximising / minimizing? Also it's linux, I did not support some design decisions of gnome back then. you can't have one setting that makes everybody happy. Even apple is not able to do that.

    But why ubuntu was successful with some sane defaults to gnome that was a great teamwork. So its clear that the distros has to make or maintain / support some extensions and then nothing crashes.

    Its pretty simpel, the problem with unity was just that the codebase was 100% different, so that of course sucks, but this 1% difference is fine when they do it. you can now philosoph if you want a own shell or only a extensionpack, but both are 1000x better than forking the desktop to a distro specific ui.

    I am for some standarts and shit, not have to much differciation, but if vanilla gnome would be perfekt for everybody what you expect it to be, what would be the point of distributions at all? We all could then use pclinuxos and get rid of all distros?

    So it was never that way, to expect that from gnome 3 is just a big thing to ask, you just can't expect. And if gnome is really not good enough for most noobs without extensions, Well then maybe even I am not a fan of canonical, they or others have to make the small settings things right and you have your standard desktop with the name ubuntu and we are back to the gnome 2 days.

    I don't see a big problem with that. for fucks sake even on android installing 1 or 2 wrong apps and your battery level is garbage or your phone crashes, why would it be different with gnome extensions from a website each kid in the basement can upload in 5 second? Your expectations are just not realistic.

    I just don't get this double standards: unity sucked in many ways, kde sucks in many ways, all other desktops have their problems, why is it such a big deal when gnome is not perfect too?

    And the stability problems at least everybody can address, as example canonical, they can maintain the extensions apparently everybody needs or nobody can use gnome and make sure there is no crash code in them and then gnome with this absolutely required extensions is stable.

    I just don't get it, gnome has to target also NOOB users, at least to some degree, so of course linux experts can't be 100% the focus, so for many developers gnome and kde and xfce and mate will not be their desktop.

    They at least to some degree have to target people that uses at least Macosx or windows. So it can't be perfect for geeks, I would never expect the elementary os be a good UI for me, that does not mean that Elementary Desktop is bad. It just has some target group. Of course gnome is more inclusive and not only focus only on noobs, but they can't be the perfect desktop for everybody, its just not possible.

    Let's put it that way gnome is the one-eyed dude between the blind… expect it to be very fast perfect is just a bit much, I mean who is supposed to make it perfect? Which company that earns with the desktop much money? The only company that maybe made some money with the desktop would be canonical, redhat doesn't make money with the desktop they invest way much more money on gnome that seems to make sense for their business, so if canonical sends 100 big nice patches and pull requests and work good together with them, I doubt the gnome devs will decline all their patches just because its from canonical.

    And even if that woould be the case they can do everything in their own shell, and then you have that and the gnome devs can pull the patches they like from there. So who do you blame gnome is just a software yes and a group, but nobody hinders any other group to make gnome "great again".

    I find it funny when ubuntu people / fans always claim that people hate on them just because they are canonical, while supporters of ubuntu do the same to the other side. Even Shuttleworth realised that this is wrong and we have to work together and not blame always the other side. It took a long time but he got there.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*