Re: Metacity, Mutter, GNOME Shell, GNOME-2.28

2009/3/30 Ted Gould <ted gould cx>:
> On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 12:07 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
>> So, basically, no I don't see a way that GNOME Shell coexists with
>> Compiz other than as two separate shells for the GNOME desktop.
> And I think that coexistence is part of the problem with GNOME Shell
> becoming the default GNOME interface.  Distributions need something that
> can gracefully decline between a composited and a non-composited
> environment.  Not saying that Compiz can do that today, but we
> effectively get that with the combination of metacity and Compiz and
> lots of nasty hacks.  But, overall it works.
> For a GNOME Shell like project to be successful it will need to have
> either two backends or some sort of architecture that would allow for
> GNOME Shell features to be integrated in other less featureful
> shell-like tools.

I don't get why that statement is true. For a GNOME Shell project to
be successful, it hast to be freakin good.
Mac OS X and Windows XP are way far more successful desktop
environments than GNOME or KDE are, and they don't even have the
notion of swappable windows managers, and if they do, none uses them.

So what's your point here?

> While I love many of the concepts being explored and have suggested
> ideas for some of them, I just simply can't see the currently
> incarnation of GNOME Shell being the default for GNOME.
>                --Ted
> _______________________________________________
> desktop-devel-list mailing list
> desktop-devel-list gnome org

Un saludo,
Alberto Ruiz

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