Re: Nautilus vs gnome-shell and the future

On Sun, 2009-12-06 at 01:45 +0100, Mark wrote:

> > I've seen nautilus as much more used as a kind of file activation
> > shell rather than a hardcore file manager, and when that changes the
> > rationale for spatial mode change too.
> Now this is interesting. I guess it was roughly 2 years ago that i
> proposed the exact same thing about browser mode. Back then it ended
> up in a huge flame war. Now you out of all people are proposing the
> same thing and suddenly you get positive responses and even gnome
> people that agree with it. Even a gnome person that proposes it! i
> must have been ahead of my time when i proposed it. More on this some
> lines down.

Interesting. You proposed gnome-shell as the replacement for nautilus as
the desktop shell two years ago? Got any links to that proposal?

> Now i didn't read every reply in this thread but i did saw the part to
> split nautilus from the file management part and the mount part. Also
> something i proposed a few years ago which was smashed down hard by a
> lot of people, you included, so i hope the following proposal isn't
> going to be smashed down since it's along the same lines just..
> different.

I don't think splitting out the automounting stuff has ever been
controversial. We're talking about a few hundred lines of code here. In
fact, its only recently that nautilus has started doing this, it was
done by gnome-volume-manager before.

> KDE did a smart thing with KDE 4. They had konqueror as there file
> management program but simply left it the way it was and made up
> Dolphin just to restart the file management from scratch and be clean
> again.
> I would propose to not touch nautilus! Make a new file manager just
> like KDE did for KDE 4. Make that file manager to __only__ manage the
> files! So you basically get a Dolphin only for Gnome. That way you can
> leave the people that want to use nautilus happy and people that want
> to use gnome-shall can use the new file manager (lets say: Sulituan
> which is nautilus in reverse).

KDE did this because konqueror was mainly a web browser. Nautilus is
already only for managing files basically. I don't understand which part
of nautilus you think are not for managing files.

> If you don't like this idea then at the very least make nautilus less
> tied with gnome. Split the desktop part, the mount part and probably
> some other part that i don't even know right now off of nautilus. Let
> nautilus do one thing: manage files. Not the desktop, not the mounts;
> only files!

What exactly do you mean by "mount part"? 

Its not really possible to split the "desktop part", its just a nautilus
window without menus or toolbar. It requires as much of the nautilus
codebase as any other nautilus window.

 Alexander Larsson                                            Red Hat, Inc 
       alexl redhat com            alexander larsson gmail com 
He's a jaded guitar-strumming werewolf with a robot buddy named Sparky. She's 
a high-kicking kleptomaniac angel with her own daytime radio talk show. They 
fight crime! 

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