Re: Gnome Shell Extensions isn't shipped with Gnome Shell, WHY?!

[Reiner Jung <prefec2 web de>]

On 22.08.2012 13:05, Clemens wrote:
> Am Mi 22 Aug 2012 12:57:12 CEST schrieb Jonathan Wilkes:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Adam  Tauno Williams <awilliam whitemice org>
>>> To: gnome-shell-list gnome org
>>> Cc:
>>> Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 6:23 AM
>>> Subject: Re: Gnome Shell Extensions isn't shipped with Gnome Shell,
>>> WHY?!
>>>
>>> On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 19:12 +0200, Florian Scandella wrote:
>>>>   I like how gnome uses
>>>>   (and drives) development of freedesktop standards instead of
>>>> reinventing
>>>>   everything and hacking arount short term limitations.
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>>   So while i'm happy with gnome-shell, i'm all for integrating some
>>> of the
>>>>   most used extensions into the core, with an option to
>>>> enable/disable them.
>>>
>>> I disagree,  core should remain thin so people can easily go in whatever
>>> direction they want.  Verses the old first-I-go-remove-all-this-crap.
>>
>> How much "thicker" does the core get by having a restart menu item in the
>> status menu?
>>
>> -Jonathan
>>
>>>
>>> Note that distributions can bundle and enable whatever extensions they
>>> want.  openSUSE packages several.  And distribution packages of GNOME
>>> are what end-users actually install and use.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> gnome-shell-list mailing list
>>> gnome-shell-list gnome org
>>> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnome-shell-list mailing list
>> gnome-shell-list gnome org
>> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-shell-list
> 
> As far is i know, the poweroff/reboot buttons were removed/are hidden
> because
> suspend is a) more efficient (time + powerconsumption) b) many people
> only use
> suspend and never poweroff there macine c) suspend is working an nearly
> all devices
> 
> (most of the time a shutdown my notebook using a terminal )

I know that, this is the argument for hiding those options. However,
normal people need to hibernate as a convenient way so save power, when
the machine is away from a power source or the use of a power source is
not that practical. Real power off is, that is my experience, used only
on occasion (e.g. after an update).

While I would agree that that suspend option is more often used to
bridge times of not using the machine, than hibernate. I do not believe
that hibernate is less important. Suspend is useful when you switch the
device of for a couple of minutes (e.g. switching trains, getting on a
plane, moving from one office/café/class to another). The hibernate
option is good for long term switch offs (e.g. over night during a
meeting, where the machine is not needed). Beside netbooks and some
fancy expensive notebooks, most portable computers run out of power in
2-3 hours. Therefore suspend is not enough, as the machine is still
draining power.

BTW: Suspend is not a safe state, at the moment power fails, your data
is corrupted (if you do not have a hibernate/suspend combo thing, like
apple).

On a side note. I have heard the argument you mentioned above, a hundred
times, but I have never seen any reliable statistics on that matter.

Therefore giving people an easy option to choose between a suspend only
thing and a suspend, hibernate, power off menu looks to me like a fair
compromise. The primary argument to not put it in, was that then so many
people have to remove it afterwards. Well you could make that argument
the other way round as well. A lot of people have to go and install it
after first login, because there is a missing option. So he compromise
is to bundle that extension and let the user decide.

For the basic setting of the enable/disable feature button, throw a dime
and get over it.

Thanks
  Reiner