Re: Please provide more configurability for workspace

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Gantry York <gantry york digitascio com> wrote:

On 12/05/2011 06:12 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-05 at 05:50 -0700, Gantry York wrote:
Does this extension allow me to move the workspace manager to a
different location on the screen and give each workspace a name? we could in GNOME2.

No clue.  I haven't tried it.  I don't see the point to static

Installing an extension is not configuration.

Sure it is.

I wouldn't consider adding on to my house "getting the guest room ready for company.

That's not quite the same analogy.  GNOME Extensions change the behaviour.  You can change how workspace management through extensions.  There is configuration option hidden or otherwise that will provide you with static workspaces.  But someone like you, missed that feature and was generous in spending their time in creating that feature so that other people can also benefit.

The dynamic workspaces is part of the default design.  You could argue that you don't like it, but that's why there is an extension system.

Configuration means to customize what is already there.  You know, like being able to move the doc, from the left side of the screen to the right side of the screen.

Yes, but static workspaces does not exist in GNOME 3.  There is nothing there to configure.  You can only modify the current workspace behavior to act like like static workspaces.  I would suggest you contact the author and see what kind of features he is planning to add.


And people install extensions / applications on their tablets, droids,
and ipads every day.  This is a concept people are very familiar with.

 "Install/write an
extension" seems to be a common mantra among the GNOME3 developers.

Of course.  It is the means provided to customize the behavior of GNOME

OK, so then why not make everything an extension?  Why is it that no one has to install a calendar extension, or a notifcations extension?

Because, GNOME has a specific identity in the default install.  The design is GNOME, so there are something in GNOME that are meant to interact with each other tightly.  A calendar extension can in fact change how the calendar applet behaves overriding what was already designed.

The bottom line is there are things that we could do in GNOME2 that we can no longer do in least not without installing an extension that may or may not exist

Yes, this is true.  But the converse  is not.  GNOME 3 can do a lot more things than GNOME 2 can ever hope to do.   GNOME 2 features can be duplicated by third party people who wish to bring those features back even if it is not part of the GNOME 3 design.  Even better, they could be enhanced to be better than what they were in GNOME 2.

I do find your attitude pretty ridiculous.

I say, "I want to be able to define static workspaces" - and you say "why would you want to do that."

He never said that.  He said he didn't use the feature.  You're reading things that wasn't written.
I say, "there is a difference between augmenting a system and configuration" - and you say, "it's the same thing"

Extensions is not augmenting it is behaviour modification which is what a configuration setting does.  As I explained earlier, you can override what is in there and change how it works.  This includes not just the visual elements, but whatever devs care to expose including network manager, evolution-data-server, and other core pieces of GNOME.
I mean really, is this the attitude that the GNOME Foundation?  It seems pretty closed minded, arrogant, and immature.

He does not speak for GNOME foundation.  We have an Executive Director who speaks for GNOME Foundation.  Adam speaks for himself as a user.
GNOME3 hasn't hit the corporate market yet; Red Hat isn't using it yet, but I know it is on their radar.  It's been discussed where I work.  The decision has been tentatively made to use Xfce instead of GNOME3 if GNOME3 abandons the GNOME2 functionality.

It's not ready for the corporate market, we've only had two releases and things move slowly in the corporate world.

Why not look into programming some of the functionality yourself and share it with others?
Let's hope Red Hat sticks up for their corporate customers.

Different doesn't mean better.

What is "better" is of course perception that is exclusive to each of us.


On 12/05/2011 04:18 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
On Sun, 2011-12-04 at 17:08 -0700, Gantry York wrote:
GNOME3-shell wouldn't be so bad if it maintained much of the
functionality that was in GNOME2.
Why can we only have dynamically allocated workspaces?
There is already an extension for maintaining a number of static
workstations.  See
Why not make it configurable so you can choose to have predefined
workspace of dynamically created workspaces.
You can to that; now, today.

gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list gnome org

Gantry S. York
Digitascio, Inc
gnome-shell-list mailing list
gnome-shell-list gnome org

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