how long can we count on GNOME 2.x in LMDE?

[danja]

hi all,

first of all I'd like to express my honest gratitude to the developers, maintainers and community of LMDE - it is a great system - it keeps me productive, fast and satisfied.
having been a long time GNU/Linux user I find LMDE fulfill my expectations of a proper and very usable Linux distro.

now my question..

having switched from Ubuntu (after the Unity flop) and gone via Debian Sid (which after an eventual `apt-get upgrade` became tainted with Gnome 3) I naturally question myself - what is the future of GNOME 2.x on LMDE? being my longtime and trusted DE, I'm still worried to loose GNOME 2.x one day, even on LMDE..

what are the plans of supporting GNOME 2.x in its current state/shape?
what is the master-plan for maintaining gtk2 libraries and dependent applications in concert with GNOME 2.x and its microcosm?
will the users of LMDE be 'transferred' onto something like MATE or a similar project, or will GNOME3 eventually creep-in into LMDE?

thanks,

[tdockery97]

The only way to completely avoid Gnome 3 on LMDE is to change to the Xfce desktop environment. It is inevitable that Gnome 3 will evolve in the Gnome-based edition. Clem has stated that he does intend to bring the MGSE Gnome 3 desktop as well as MATE into LMDE to reduce the impact, as well as provide as close to the current DE as is possible with a GTK3 base. It is at most a matter of months now before the complete change takes place.

Edit: Actually the second way to avoid the coming change is to switch to the LMDE KDE edition when it is released in the next 30-60 days.

[danja]

The only way to completely avoid Gnome 3 on LMDE is to change to the Xfce desktop environment. It is inevitable that Gnome 3 will evolve in the Gnome-based
edition. Clem has stated that he does intend to bring the MGSE Gnome 3 desktop as well as MATE into LMDE to reduce the impact, as well as provide as close to the current DE as is possible with a GTK3 base. It is at most a matter of months now before the complete change takes place.

Edit: Actually the second way to avoid the coming change is to switch to the LMDE KDE edition when it is released in the next 30-60 days.

appreciate your answer.

much grateful for your consideration to attempt to stay 'as close as possible' to the current DE..
i'd be very curious to see some pie-charts illustrating the drop in user-base of mainline Ubuntu (and others as well..) after they decided to just dump their users' workflow like they did.
usually i'm having no reservations about having to upgrade and adopt 'the future' as long as this future is an option. Unfortunately KDE is not an option for me.. XFCE however fits the bill, but as Linus T. said (iirc) "XFCE is like GNOME from the previous century"..

thanks again,

[altair4]

XFCE however fits the bill, but as Linus T. said (iirc) "XFCE is like GNOME from the previous century"..

But it's the DE "Linus T" uses: https://plus.google.com/106327083461132 ... bnL3KaVRtM

I'm using Xfce. I think it's a step down from gnome2, but it's a huge step up from gnome3. Really.

[danja]

XFCE however fits the bill, but as Linus T. said (iirc) "XFCE is like GNOME from the previous century"..

But it's the DE "Linus T" uses: https://plus.google.com/106327083461132 ... bnL3KaVRtM

I'm using Xfce. I think it's a step down from gnome2, but it's a huge step up from gnome3. Really.

right, Linus is using XFCE but this doesn't automagically mean that XFCE is a solution the current situation with DEs.
May be I'm not patient enough but after trying to hammer-in-shape my former XFCE install I just gave up at the point when I couldn't find any proper sound-control-applet.. It works but it's no comparison to classic GNOME experience.

[Oscar799]

Moved here from the main forum

[altair4]

I didn't mean to imply that XFCE was on par with Gnome2 in terms of functionality, although it's certainly come a long way since I've used it last, it's just that it's a reasonable alternative that offers much the same function.

I use Xubuntu 11.10 and it pretty much does everything I need it to do. Let's face it, XFCE is the future of the desktop. It may not be applicable to a tablet or a phone or whatever Gnome3 and Unity are designed for but for the desktop .....

[danja]

I use Xubuntu 11.10 and it pretty much does everything I need it to do. Let's face it, XFCE is the future of the desktop. It may not be applicable to a tablet or a phone or whatever Gnome3 and Unity are designed for but for the desktop .....

I do agree with you that the future of (professional) Desktop UI is not going to (and shouldn't!) embrace touch input and modal views (one app per screen, etc). However this does not mean that we need to 'downgrade' our experience and expectations.
On the positive note - the demand that traditional DE is in right now will surely spring-up new developments and/or refactoring of existing projects. I'm certain it is feasible to implement a great DE based on GTK3 which will dwarf XFCE4 and GNOME2 put together.

In terms of being future-proof XFCE is not a long term solution - it's based entirely on nearly deprecated GTK2; neither any project like MATE or Pinguy 'mods' will yield anything sustainable.

Clearly, a new DE is needed.

[gavinhc]

I have a few questions for the anti-Gnome3 crowd. I'm sorry if these may come across as sounding like I'm trolling or anything like that, but these come from genuine curiosity about why you are so opposed to the DE that I have been enjoying for a couple months now.

But it's the DE "Linus T" uses: https://plus.google.com/106327083461132 ... bnL3KaVRtM

I have seen many people speaking out against Gnome-Shell quoting this Linux Torvalds post as a reason why it is terrible. I don't deny that Torvalds has made a huge contribution to the Linux community and free software in general with the Linux kernel, but he isn't a UI designer and as far as I know he has never worked on any of the DEs. Using him in your argument seems to me like quoting Stephen Hawking saying he doesn't like the traditional portrayal of the Battle of Waterloo in the history books.

I do agree with you that the future of (professional) Desktop UI is not going to (and shouldn't!) embrace touch input and modal views (one app per screen, etc).

I haven't used Unity, so I can't speak for that, but have you actually used Gnome-Shell before saying this about it (which I'll admit is a common criticism thrown at the Shell)? I have been running the Shell on a 20 inch widescreen monitor and can tell you that it is remarkably easy to tile multiple windows and applications side-by-side on this DE. It is also in no way requiring touch input to work properly and, in fact, I have found that it is the easiest DE I've used to navigate with a mouse and keyboard. It requires fewer keystrokes and smoother, but admittedly longer, mouse movements to open applications, switch programs, and generally interact with the system in a useful way.

Having used Gnome 3.0, I will admit that there are still some parts that require work, but most reports say that 3.2 is a huge improvement. Was Gnome 2.0 as complete, stable, and feature-rich as 2.32 was or did it still require work on release and only became as loved as it did after recieving 16 major updates?

[altair4]

I have a few questions for the anti-Gnome3 crowd. I'm sorry if these may come across as sounding like I'm trolling or anything like that, but these come from genuine curiosity about why you are so opposed to the DE that I have been enjoying for a couple months now.

But it's the DE "Linus T" uses: https://plus.google.com/106327083461132 ... bnL3KaVRtM

I have seen many people speaking out against Gnome-Shell quoting this Linux Torvalds post as a reason why it is terrible. I don't deny that Torvalds has made a huge contribution to the Linux community and free software in general with the Linux kernel, but he isn't a UI designer and as far as I know he has never worked on any of the DEs. Using him in your argument seems to me like quoting Stephen Hawking saying he doesn't like the traditional portrayal of the Battle of Waterloo in the history books.

That specific quote of mine was not to justify whatever my feelings about Gnome3, Unity, or Hannah Montana Linux are but in response to this specific comment from the OP nothing more:

danja wrote: XFCE however fits the bill, but as Linus T. said (iirc) "XFCE is like GNOME from the previous century"..

[hirwen]

Unity and gnome shell offer a stunning visual interface, modern. Unfortunately I have no touch screen and I can't work with. MATE certainly will be my next friend.

[bimsebasse]

The touchscreen complaint directed at Gnome Shell is weird - it would be a rubbish touchscreen interface as it is. It's custom made for desktop, just very much favouring a certain kind of work flow at the expense of another. Despite Ubuntu fanboys and Unity critics alike similarly declaring Unity perfect for touchscreen, I don't see that either as long as the launcher, app menu and window buttons all are hiding from your fingertips and only can be summoned with a mouse or keyboard shortcuts.

It's a bit like when people over the age of 50 call all new music "techno". Not all DEs that don't work like Gnome 2 are therefore meant for tablets.

[altair4]

It's a bit like when people over the age of 50 call all new music "techno". Not all DEs that don't work like Gnome 2 are therefore meant for tablets.

This is totally unrelated to this conversation but the comment about over 50 folks reminded me of something that "you know who" wrote a couple of years ago concerning replacing BIOS with EFI: http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux ... /0300.html

So EFI has this cool shell, a loadable driver framework, and other nice
features. Where "nice" obviously means "much more complex than the simple
things they designed in the late seventies back when people were stupid
and just wanted things to work".

Of course, it's somewhat questionable whether people have actually gotten
smarter or stupider in the last 30 years. It's not enough time for
evolution to have increased our brain capacity, but it certainly _is_
enough time for most people to no longer understand how hardware works any
more.

[gavinhc]

That specific quote of mine was not to justify whatever my feelings about Gnome3, Unity, or Hannah Montana Linux are but in response to this specific comment from the OP nothing more:

danja wrote: XFCE however fits the bill, but as Linus T. said (iirc) "XFCE is like GNOME from the previous century"..

I'm sorry if you took my quoting you to mean I thought you were supporting the statement. I simply quoted your post rather than danja's because you were providing an actual link to Torvalds's statements about Gnome3 that so many people have been referring back to and my question was directed more to the community in general than you or anyone else in particular.

[samriggs]

This dispute will probably go on for a year or two about unity and what gnome did.
The founder doesn't like it, I read that article, but he's not the only one if you read through the article, even the ones that promote it don't use it for their working station, that part caught me, because they are promoting it but not using it themselves.
Either way it has happened and not much we can do about it unless we find a way to come out with an entirely new version that would keep everyone happy. (something I see Clem trying to do with his msge extensions) which I was pleased to see.
Again since it has happened it all comes down to personal choice.
I tried unity and gnome 3 and gnome 3.2, I liked them at first myself, I personally found activities a total waste of my time but others like it and use it a lot and find it makes their work a lot easier.
I use this thing for a lot of work so I tired all three (unity, gnome 3 and xfce) although xfce isn't gnome 2 it's close enough and I found, for me, I got my work done a lot quicker and easier in xfce then unity and gnome 3, whether it's because I am used to that interface or not from gnome 2 who knows, but I did give gnome 3 a long enough test (pretty much since the first version came out and made quite a few themes for it also).
Far as a work station goes, xfce works better for me, for some others gnome 3 might fit better for what they do. From what I been reading quite a few developers prefer the old way over to gnome 3 and unity for working, personally I can see why for me but again that's not for everyone, some prefer the gnome 3 still.
I put my sister on gnome 3.2 and she got constant crashes even though there was no reason for it (I just pretty much everything to see why) so I downgraded her to gnome 3.0 and it worked fine, but she prefers xfce so it's being installed and goodbye gnome, another person I installed wants xfce instead, the only one left is my wife who tried gnome 3.2 but prefers gnome 3 instead, (I had it set up exactly how she liked it in gnome 3.0 so that is probably why plus it had the wine version which allowed her to play an extremely old game which dies in the new wine version
But lets face it, unless MATE can do it gnome 2 is history now, not much can be done about it.
For those of us who want or need that old way back we do have 2 choices, xfce and kde or fluxbox.
Hopefully all this will tick off the right people and maybe if were lucky a new development team will get together and create an old way desktop again, if they do I am sure there will be a lot of folks flocking to it although xfce is pretty close and wouldn't take much to just add to that one.

Sam

[hirwen]

Far as a work station goes, xfce works better for me, for some others gnome 3 might fit better for what they do. From what I been reading quite a few developers prefer the old way over to gnome 3 and unity for working, personally I can see why for me but again that's not for everyone, some prefer the gnome 3 still.

I totally agree. I'm not against unity or gnome shell, because it's not for lack of trying, but my computer is my work tool, and unfortunately their use is not productive for me. It remains possible that is for other. If I migrated from Ubuntu to Mint, it's because I have here a choice. Xfce or KDE could be an alternative...

[samriggs]

Far as a work station goes, xfce works better for me, for some others gnome 3 might fit better for what they do. From what I been reading quite a few developers prefer the old way over to gnome 3 and unity for working, personally I can see why for me but again that's not for everyone, some prefer the gnome 3 still.

I totally agree. I'm not against unity or gnome shell, because it's not for lack of trying, but my computer is my work tool, and unfortunately their use is not productive for me. It remains possible that is for other. If I migrated from Ubuntu to Mint, it's because I have here a choice. Xfce or KDE could be an alternative...

Thats the beauty of mint. Clem gave us as much choices as possible.
Some prefer KDE over XFCE and KDE is coming out with a new version, not sure how it is but I prefer xfce over kde for working.
It might be good to test both just to try it out to see which one would work better.
I tried KDE long ago and always prefered gnome over it and xfce if I can't get gnome the old way, but again for others, kde might be better for them.
I did enjoy gnome 3 when I had it, it was different and I did enjoy themeing for it but not good for a work station for me.
Who knows, if I can get some spare time maybe I'll come up with xfce themes, although the frames are very limited in what you can do with them, not like metacity where you can do pretty much anything.
Unity though, I tried that a couple of times, at first I dispised it totally, so I even gave it another try later on just to see if anything was changed and made better, it remained on my system for two days before I got rid of it again. Some love it, me personally for me, it is probably the worst linux system out there, but that's just my opinion and not worth a hill of beans

[addegsson]

Personally I do love the use of Debian testing as base and their goal of making it more user friendly but I just can not use it with LMDE repos. The development progress of this project is to slow for me, and I am sure some people disagree with me, but I want a distro that is up to date (not necessarily bleeding edge). I want to see progress and dedication, you know the latest update pack was released several months ago. Right now I'm doing fine on my own Debian testing installation, but it's a shame that they don't give Debian more love as there is definitely room for a user friendly Debian distro.