GNOME Shell [Archive] - Page 7

View Full Version : GNOME Shell

Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8

Peter09

March 31st, 2010, 01:29 PM

Roasted

March 31st, 2010, 01:49 PM

I must admit I am finding gnome-shell a bit difficult at the moment. I am working quite a lot with my laptop balenced on my lap. This normally involves one hand (right) using the touchpad while the other uses the left mouse key (touchpad key). A standard practice - This is relatively stable.

However, in gnome shell, when I need an application thats not in my favourites I have to use the keyboard. This requires not just moving both hands, but a shift in body stance as well. Not good - in this situation - I revert back to normal gnome.

While I could select from the task display its difficult to target the application right away.

Well, there's simply no doubt that they should revert back to the single file vertical listing of applications that they had last month. This grid is nothing short of completely ridiculous. I think everybody can agree they find it cumbersome to quick-scan the grid for an application with the grid setup.

While I can understand some frustration, I have to just throw out there that it's definitely worthwhile to use Gnome Shell for a while to get used to it. The one thing I think is important to note that if you hit the super key, you get kicked into overview mode right then with your cursor in the search. Then you can type the application you want and hit enter, and there it is. I use this same method in regular Gnome with a fantastic application known as Gnome-Do. I barely use the menu in Gnome 2.X because of it. :P

While I do think Gnome Shell has things "relatively balanced" there are still a few things I think really need to be fixed up or implemented all together.

A dock-like function. Let's get over ourselves. Most people want it. Most people that use Gnome Shell are already using Docky with it. I can't see the notification system turning into a dock. It's a place to display notifications and better integrate other apps to it. That's all well and good, but what if I want to switch to my email client to write an email but the notification system doesn't have it displayed because... there's no notifications available for it. What if I'm a power user where I do this all day every day and going to the overview mode to switch applications 4 times every 15 seconds makes me sick? Where is it? Remove that thing where it says your currently primary window. I don't need to know that. I know what my primary window is because I'm currently using that primary window... I'd much rather have a dock-like function there in the top panel. Or at least the OPTION to do so... Otherwise most people will look at GS as a puzzle with 1 missing piece, and Docky being the last piece.

And of course, the application layout... back to vertical. It was so much easier...

Hey does anybody remember, if we were in the application list back when it was in vertical mode, if we hit the first key of the application we were looking for, did it bring up an alphabetical listing accordingly? For example, it'd be cool if you're somebody who has 4,000 things installed to type "S" and all of your "S" applications show up.

k3lt01

March 31st, 2010, 08:55 PM

There has never been a full lists of available applications on G-S. It is something I have mentioned from the very beginning of Lucid testing.

Fred2a

March 31st, 2010, 09:27 PM

augias

April 1st, 2010, 08:04 PM

Does the current use of the top bar as a place to show the application Icon/Name not lend itself to having a global menu up there as well?

Just move the clock back to the right.

This would save some much needed screen space.

The design document postulates using the Focused app Icon on the panel as the application's menu.

http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet look under "The Panel"

Merk42

April 1st, 2010, 09:03 PM

The design document postulates using the Focused app Icon on the panel as the application's menu.

http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/CheatSheet look under "The Panel"

What menu is that though?
The one that was removed in Lucid (Minimize, move to workspace, etc) or the one that is below the title bar (commonly file, edit, etc)?

ranch hand

April 1st, 2010, 09:17 PM

What menu is that though?
The one that was removed in Lucid (Minimize, move to workspace, etc) or the one that is below the title bar (commonly file, edit, etc)?
Yes, it looks to me like a silly redundancy of the menu on the app.

I have no idea what is wrong with a menu you can actually use for apps but there must be something bad about the idea that you could actually use the DE for more than live chat and being a "twit" (that is the correct term for folks on twitter I am sure).

augias

April 2nd, 2010, 02:21 AM

What menu is that though?
The one that was removed in Lucid (Minimize, move to workspace, etc) or the one that is below the title bar (commonly file, edit, etc)?

The lead designer's proposal in the design document (http://www.gnome.org/~mccann/shell/design/GNOME_Shell-20091114.pdf) proposes the active app item take on the responsability of controls over the application as a whole as opposed to individual window tasks like close, maximize etc.

So the current possible uses mccan proposes for it are quit, force quit and work signals such as launching or busy.

Possibilities I see but aren't discussed yet are a "help" and "file" and maybe a window chooser.

Mblackwell

April 2nd, 2010, 02:43 AM

Well, there's simply no doubt that they should revert back to the single file vertical listing of applications that they had last month. This grid is nothing short of completely ridiculous. I think everybody can agree they find it cumbersome to quick-scan the grid for an application with the grid setup.

I agree. If they're going to keep the grid they should at least change some of the spacing and have a way to see the full name of an app. I posted a bug and mockup about this awhile back.

Bug:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=610871

Mockup:
http://mb.mirage.org/bugzilla/mockups/moreapps001/index.html

As you can see, no responses.

It should also have a way to categorize the applications. Alphabetically dumping out a list of all applications just doesn't work for me. I have way too many games and sound/audio editing applications.

ranch hand

April 2nd, 2010, 02:47 AM

I think it is a logical move in making the OS more "user friendly" to appeal to a "broader audience". We are going for the bottom rungs of MS users. You know the ones that work at places with pictures on the cash registers.

I can read.

NightwishFan

April 2nd, 2010, 02:53 AM

I am beginning to have more faith in the Gnome shell. The release of Gnome 2.30 applications is great, I have finally switched to Epiphany full time. (It still has some pretty big issues in my book but none are show stoppers).

Roasted

April 2nd, 2010, 03:16 AM

NightwishFan

April 2nd, 2010, 03:19 AM

I am running Gnome 2.30 right now, with the Gnome 2 interface. I keep track of the shell on my other machine using the ricotz ppa. (It plays better with Karmic). My point was Gnome always seems to be chugging forward despite it's faults.

autocrosser

April 2nd, 2010, 03:23 AM

I've changed to AWN--it's growing on me & doing what I want it to (now)...

Interesting note for anyone wanting have a wallpaper changer.....the old version of wallpaper-tray (0.4.6) in the repos works...it even shows up in the upper GS panel. You will need to pin it because a newer version exists & it won't work in GS---go figure......

augias

April 2nd, 2010, 03:27 AM

I agree. If they're going to keep the grid they should at least change some of the spacing and have a way to see the full name of an app. I posted a bug and mockup about this awhile back.

Bug:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=610871

Mockup:
http://mb.mirage.org/bugzilla/mockups/moreapps001/index.html

As you can see, no responses.

It should also have a way to categorize the applications. Alphabetically dumping out a list of all applications just doesn't work for me. I have way too many games and sound/audio editing applications.

It is being categorized, there is a patch under construction in bugzilla. This is the mockup (http://people.gnome.org/~mccann/screenshots/clips/20100308223727/shell-mockup-overview-location-browse.png).

Gotta have a little faith and keep yourself informed. Remember, these are the same guys that made gnome 2 a hit; we're just waitin for the repeat performance.

Mblackwell

April 2nd, 2010, 03:38 AM

That looks... really hard to look at?

Roasted

April 2nd, 2010, 03:41 PM

It is being categorized, there is a patch under construction in bugzilla. This is the mockup (http://people.gnome.org/~mccann/screenshots/clips/20100308223727/shell-mockup-overview-location-browse.png).

Gotta have a little faith and keep yourself informed. Remember, these are the same guys that made gnome 2 a hit; we're just waitin for the repeat performance.

Um.. yeah... not so sure about that screenshot...

augias

April 2nd, 2010, 08:14 PM

That looks... really hard to look at?

Are we talking about usability or color and style? Please be constructive and explain and discuss what you mean or else all that happens is that I feel insulted for trying to be helpful by informing the thread about what's happening at Gnome.

That thing is called a mockup, and designers use them to plan and imagine possible usabilty cases and aim the project in the right direction. Then a developer implements pieces little by little and the kinks get sorted out as the trueness of the mockup is tested.

Vacuous comments like "this sucks I hate it" belong on youtube, not here on a board full of thoughtful people such as yourselves.

nhasian

April 2nd, 2010, 10:38 PM

according to:

apt-cache policy gnome-shell

2.28.1~git20091125-1 0
500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/ lucid/universe Packages

wasn't gnome-shell 2.30 released with gnome 2.30 two days ago?

Roasted

April 3rd, 2010, 12:02 AM

augias

April 3rd, 2010, 12:08 AM

I think the usability of it looks very poor.

edit: N/M I give up. Troglodytes win.

NightwishFan

April 3rd, 2010, 12:26 AM

edit: N/M I give up. Troglodytes win.

You played a good game. :popcorn:

Roasted

April 3rd, 2010, 12:40 AM

edit: N/M I give up. Troglodytes win.

You asked.
I told.

Mblackwell

April 3rd, 2010, 12:43 AM

Are we talking about usability or color and style? Please be constructive and explain and discuss what you mean or else all that happens is that I feel insulted for trying to be helpful by informing the thread about what's happening at Gnome.

That thing is called a mockup, and designers use them to plan and imagine possible usabilty cases and aim the project in the right direction. Then a developer implements pieces little by little and the kinks get sorted out as the trueness of the mockup is tested.

Vacuous comments like "this sucks I hate it" belong on youtube, not here on a board full of thoughtful people such as yourselves.

I've obviously posted a mockup myself and know what they are. You're being incredibly insulting.

Did you make the mockup? If you didn't then I don't know why I'd address specifically with you what's wrong with it. The same if you're not working on that area of the project. If you are, I'll give you more specific criticisms if you're actually interested in hearing them. If not I'll just stick with my original, polite answer of "it's hard to look at".

Frankly, you didn't even post a link to the bug. Why would I post on the Ubuntu forums what might be changed, especially since I have no idea what the current status is or what other people have said about it.

In the future please try to have a polite discourse rather than being accusatory and dismissive.

Roasted

April 3rd, 2010, 01:06 AM

in the future please try to have a polite discourse rather than being accusatory and dismissive.

^ +1

benerivo

April 3rd, 2010, 01:41 AM

Was this mockup made by William Jon McCann, who also has these screenshots...

http://people.gnome.org/~mccann/screenshots/clips/

The interface seems fine to me. I would like to see the categorised list distinguished more from the rest of the shell background. Maybe with larger icons/text or with a stronger colour contrast than just a dimming of the shell background.

NightwishFan

April 3rd, 2010, 01:49 AM

I really hope the interface is not fully locked down, and we can hide the panel, etc. It would be great to modify behavior. Perhaps a configuration GUI is due for GDM as well. (Technically there is one, but it really has some nasty side effects for me)

hrhnick

April 3rd, 2010, 02:39 AM

Experiencing a weird issue. I always used Chromium. Uninstalled it, tried Chrome, uninstalled Chrome, now back on Chromium. When I go into the overlay now, Chromium runs in a new "icon" and not in the original launcher. Also interesting is that it now ignores my icon theme defaulting to the original icon. This issue never happened before, and doesn't happen on my laptop, which runs an almost identical package set. Anybody?

http://i39.tinypic.com/5bzdwz_th.png (http://i39.tinypic.com/5bzdwz.png)

ad_267

April 3rd, 2010, 04:12 AM

Anyone know what the story is with the application menu? They're not seriously going to just chuck all your applications into one big grid arranged alphabetically are they?

NightwishFan

April 3rd, 2010, 04:14 AM

I hope not, that would lead to much visual clutter. :o

Clicking less is good but not that less. Beginners would not know where to start.

moore.bryan

April 3rd, 2010, 12:05 PM

praveenthivari

April 3rd, 2010, 01:14 PM

Where are the System-->Administration settings in Gnome-shell.

waspbr

April 3rd, 2010, 01:20 PM

I wish the gnome-shell activities menu was a little more customizable, following the GTK theme and perhaps with optional menus. for one I don't use the recent documents bit very often, I would appreciate having a gnome 2.0 style applications menu As one of the options.

Sure there is one applications menu, but it is a long list, and it maybe handier to have it subdivided into sections.

If there is already a way to customize the shell then please let me know.

Though I know that most devs seem to be busy with making things work, then focus on the asthetics...

hrhnick

April 3rd, 2010, 01:58 PM

If you're referring to the blue/white icon instead of the Chrome green/red/yellow, that's because it's Chromium and not Chrome... different icon.
:-)

no.
when i "pin" a favorite to the overlay, the program gets outlined when its running. for chromium however, it makes a new icon and runs separate from the pinned favorite. it's all kinda confusing.

Merk42

April 3rd, 2010, 05:06 PM

Where are the System-->Administration settings in Gnome-shell.

Don't have GNOME Shell on me right now, but I'm pretty sure it's the top right under System Preferences.

Psumi

April 3rd, 2010, 05:27 PM

Don't have GNOME Shell on me right now, but I'm pretty sure it's the top right under System Preferences.

That is, of course, if you're using it from the PPA and not the repos.

Thomas Garman

April 4th, 2010, 04:43 PM

I like the GNOME Shell concept. I like the way when you click on "activities" and then "applications" it looks like the screen of an iPod Touch. But why list all of the games with the real apps in one box. It's cluttered. There should be one button for "games" that will open a new box and show them all together and apart from everything else.

NightwishFan

April 4th, 2010, 07:53 PM

From whats being said on the mailing list they are baking their noodles about this. ;)

bash

April 5th, 2010, 11:11 AM

Another round of ideas and mockups for the Shell. In this case for the «system status tray».

You can find a nice summary here:
http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2010/04/gnome-shell-system-status-area-mockups.html

Or the full documentation and all mock-ups over that GNOME Shell "homepage":
http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Design/Guidelines/SystemStatus

carlosgs91

April 5th, 2010, 12:52 PM

Hi, on Karmic this worked:

sudo apt-get install gnome-shell

But in Lucid it looks that it's not on the repositories, so how can I install it? is there a .deb package over there? ^^

howefield

April 5th, 2010, 12:59 PM

But in Lucid it looks that it's not on the repositories, so how can I install it? is there a .deb package over there? ^^

It is in the universe repository...

http://packages.ubuntu.com/lucid/gnome-shell

23meg

April 5th, 2010, 02:21 PM

I'm closing this thread temporarily, for people to cool off. Non-technical discussion regarding GNOME Shell will be moved to Community Cafe from this point on.

Muhammad Ahmed

April 5th, 2010, 03:23 PM

installing gnome-shell on lucid lynx says dependency not satisfiable ljke

gnome-shell:
Depends: libgjs0 but it is not going to be installed

cadu-fpolis

April 6th, 2010, 01:23 AM

installing gnome-shell on lucid lynx says dependency not satisfiable ljke

gnome-shell:
Depends: libgjs0 but it is not going to be installed

Same results here. Anyone got pass this?

Thanks.

descendent87

April 6th, 2010, 01:29 AM

The package needs updating badly, a lot has changed on gnome-shell since november

Merk42

April 6th, 2010, 01:29 AM

You could try building from source or the Ricotz PPA (http://ubuntu-tweak.com/source/ricotz-testing/)

I hope the GNOME Shell thread (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1305154) gets unlocked soon...though I guess this could just eventually get merged into it

jjcv

April 6th, 2010, 02:16 AM

cariboo907

April 6th, 2010, 02:45 AM

I moved the off topic posts to the Cafe.

Tompalaz

April 6th, 2010, 08:33 AM

Finaly gnome-shell start with the nouveau driver.
However, when windows are in windowed mode they're in high-contrast, and sometimes I can't see anything.

When windows are in maximized/fullscreen they look like they should...

See picture.

Edit: Tried PPA and building from source.
I don't know if there is a dependency problem :/

null_pointer_us

April 6th, 2010, 01:24 PM

I suggest you follow the instructions at the bottom of this page.

http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell

I have used this build method now for the last six months. It is also a good way to keep up with the latest version.

Your suggestion worked very smoothly for me until here:

cd ~/gnome-shell/source/gnome-shell/src
./gnome-shell --replace

...which produced:

****@****-vbox-ubuntu:~$ cd ~/gnome-shell/source/gnome-shell/src
****@****-vbox-ubuntu:~/gnome-shell/source/gnome-shell/src$ ./gnome-shell --replace
OpenGL Warning: glXChooseFBConfigSGIX not implemented by Chromium
Window manager error: Unable to initialize Clutter.
****@****-vbox-ubuntu:~/gnome-shell/source/gnome-shell/src$ Window manager warning: Screen 0 on display ":0.0" already has a window manager; try using the --replace option to replace the current window manager.
Cannot register the panel shell: there is already one running.

(Ubuntu 10.04 beta 1 AMD64 running in VBox 3.1.6 w/ GA on Win 7 64-bit host)

Anyone with a native installation have more luck?

Merk42

April 6th, 2010, 01:28 PM

Your suggestion worked very smoothly for me until here:

cd ~/gnome-shell/source/gnome-shell/src
./gnome-shell --replace

...which produced:

****@****-vbox-ubuntu:~$ cd ~/gnome-shell/source/gnome-shell/src
****@****-vbox-ubuntu:~/gnome-shell/source/gnome-shell/src$ ./gnome-shell --replace
OpenGL Warning: glXChooseFBConfigSGIX not implemented by Chromium
Window manager error: Unable to initialize Clutter.
****@****-vbox-ubuntu:~/gnome-shell/source/gnome-shell/src$ Window manager warning: Screen 0 on display ":0.0" already has a window manager; try using the --replace option to replace the current window manager.
Cannot register the panel shell: there is already one running.

(Ubuntu 10.04 beta 1 AMD64 running in VBox 3.1.6 w/ GA on Win 7 64-bit host)

Anyone with a native installation have more luck?

First post of this thread:

Don't try it in a Virtual Machine
http://www.markecurtis.com/etc/gnomeshell/virtualbox.png

As far as I know it has to do with Virtualbox's not yet 100% 3D emulation

If you build from source, everything gets saved to ~/gnome-shell so there's really no need to run it in a VM.

null_pointer_us

April 6th, 2010, 02:45 PM

Yeah, I figured it was a problem with vbox.

Remember, the first post of this thread was last November. Both gnome shell and vbox has have seen a bit of work since then. Apparently, not quite enough to get it working.

FWIW, failing with a useful error message is decidedly better than corrupting the whole screen.

Mblackwell

April 7th, 2010, 03:45 PM

Did anyone else update from the PPA this morning and now GNOME Shell crashes when going to the overview?

JS LOG: GNOME Shell started at Wed Apr 07 2010 09:38:24 GMT-0500 (CST)
Shell killed with signal 11

Is all I get for log output.

sgage

April 7th, 2010, 04:22 PM

Yes, I get the same thing. I've seen it mentioned in another thread. Just have to wait for the next update, I guess...

HolidayQueen

April 7th, 2010, 09:31 PM

I tried to get into Gnome shell, but i just couldn't. My personal opinion is that it's awful. It took forever to get Compiz working properly on some of my computers, and now that it does, ive managed to configure my environment under the current gnome just the way i like it.

I feel that Gnome shell takes a lot of that control over my environment away from me. And for what, to appeal to windows users who probably won't switch to linux anyways? (those of whom ive managed to convert did so because linux is faster, they can synchronize their ipods without the bloated itunes, viruses are a non-issue, and in their own words, linux is like mac on pc).

I won't knock it for those that like it, im just saying, i'd rather stay in control of my own environment. I sincerely hope that in future release, the installer will offer the choice between classic gnome and gnome shell. Otherwise, I will convert myself (and others) to xubuntu.

Mblackwell

April 7th, 2010, 10:11 PM

Since GNOME Shell is extensible and uses CSS for all of the theming and a good chunk of the element size/positioning it should in many ways be even more customizable. Unfortunately not all of this is completely implemented yet. For instance you can change the way things look and feel via CSS (very nicely in fact, I've also messed with the JS files once or twice to change a few things) but you'll have to redo it next time you update through the PPA.

And yes, GNOME 2.0's desktop will still be available at least in the first release of GNOME 3.

HolidayQueen

April 7th, 2010, 10:20 PM

While my main activity on the computer is building websites (JS/ajax, CSS and all the rest) i wouldn't be comfortable using it to customize my desktop. I like the simple GUI's, the gnome panel applets, the fact that my panels can be placed where i like, any number of them, have them autohide, expand, etc.

On my netbook, my panel consists of the ubuntu icon for the main menu, dockbarx, and the tray, the panel is only a few icons wide. I use Compiz ring-switcher with Alt Tab to cycle through my windows, i find this arrangement very elegant and functional for my tiny screen.

I still feel that gnome shell is something that should be offered on top of regular gnome, rather than as a replacement, much in the same way you can toggle visual effects.

Merk42

April 7th, 2010, 10:25 PM

I feel that Gnome shell takes a lot of that control over my environment away from me. And for what, to appeal to windows users who probably won't switch to linux anyways?

How did you jump to the conclusion that GNOME Shell was created to appeal to Windows users?

While my main activity on the computer is building websites (JS/ajax, CSS and all the rest) i wouldn't be comfortable using it to customize my desktop. I like the simple GUI's, the gnome panel applets, the fact that my panels can be placed where i like, any number of them, have them autohide, expand, etc.

GNOME Shell is early, as in, not even final. What's stopping anyone from making a GUI to configure the CSS? (think something like Dreamweaver)

HolidayQueen

April 7th, 2010, 11:00 PM

first page of this thread there is a post stating that gnome shell is meant to appeal to the bottom rungs of windows users.

Now weather or not the poster is actually representative of gnome shell i can't say.

But i'll ask this, who is gnome shell actually trying to appeal to? So far the only people from whom i've heard positive reviews is those who generally like to play with new things. (desktop environments to play with, and desktop environments to produce with, are two very different things in my books).

HolidayQueen

April 7th, 2010, 11:12 PM

GNOME Shell is early, as in, not even final. What's stopping anyone from making a GUI to configure the CSS? (think something like Dreamweaver)

Perhaps so. I may even be able to imitate the user interface i enjoy now, but i wont have the same functionality i wish to keep.

Shell is an interesting concept, but IMHO, it's best chance of success is as a supplement. If you intend it as a replacement, then i smell another fork of ubuntu. (Gnome Do was an interesting concept too, but you don't see it installed by default today).

Roasted

April 8th, 2010, 02:23 AM

Perhaps so. I may even be able to imitate the user interface i enjoy now, but i wont have the same functionality i wish to keep.

Shell is an interesting concept, but IMHO, it's best chance of success is as a supplement. If you intend it as a replacement, then i smell another fork of ubuntu. (Gnome Do was an interesting concept too, but you don't see it installed by default today).

You mean another fork of Gnome, not Ubuntu.

I've been slowly beginning to agree. I work in IT, and I'm just not entirely sure *yet* how I would ever consider implementing this to the masses.

I don't want to be judgmental quite yet, because the truth is it's NOT done and it has a long way to go. But the more I use Gnome Shell, while I think it's very interesting with the way it's laid out, I'm just not sure I'd want to use it full time.

Chances are the masses will help dictate this movement, however. If the masses use GS and think poorly of it, it'd be suicide to barf out GS as default instead of an option. So who knows... it's hard to say. Definitely keeping the faith with GS, but I'm not all about it like I previously was.

HolidayQueen

April 8th, 2010, 02:37 AM

You mean another fork of Gnome, not Ubuntu.

I've been slowly beginning to agree. I work in IT, and I'm just not entirely sure *yet* how I would ever consider implementing this to the masses.

I don't want to be judgmental quite yet, because the truth is it's NOT done and it has a long way to go. But the more I use Gnome Shell, while I think it's very interesting with the way it's laid out, I'm just not sure I'd want to use it full time.

Chances are the masses will help dictate this movement, however. If the masses use GS and think poorly of it, it'd be suicide to barf out GS as default instead of an option. So who knows... it's hard to say. Definitely keeping the faith with GS, but I'm not all about it like I previously was.

Sorry yeah i meant to say a fork of gnome. But if ubuntu were to force gnome shell onto the masses, then you can bet someone is gonna come up with a ubuntu-based distro with pure gnome in it's stead.

I dunno, it would be cool if, lets say, you could chose GS at login much like you chose XFCE or KDE (if you have'em installed).

But as i said in the beginning, i can't see myself being very productive working on websites in gnome shell, im too used to just Alt Tab'ing between gedit and chromium, which i do practically every time i change a line of code, i simply try to avoid the mouse as much as possible in such a context. (That and i waited an eternity for compiz to work properly on some of my computers, i can't imagine parting with it now lol)

AndyP79

April 8th, 2010, 03:43 AM

Roasted

April 8th, 2010, 01:32 PM

I finally got to install Gnome Shell. Interesting. I am using it for this moment, buttt..... I think it is something good for a start. I saw several things that I don't really like, and I am sure many others feel the same way. I am not against change at all, but I understand this is not the final product. I hope that they change many features that everyone is griping about and this could be a great thing. Hopefully it does not turn out how KDE 4 did in the beginning. If it does, I will probably wait until 12.04 for the next LTS?

I REALLY doubt we'll see a repeat of KDE 4 ever. I feel as though right now, today, Gnome Shell is more stable than KDE 4 was during its initial release. The Gnome devs are implementing things slowly and in a calculated manner so it's not too much too soon. But they seem to have some tricks up their sleeve, so let's see what happens.

Tompalaz

April 11th, 2010, 09:25 PM

A rather weird problem.

When I connect my external screen and use gnome-shell the performance is quite good, I'd say fast even. Though, when I disconnect the screen and just use the laptop it's slow and not that fast at all.

nvidia driver
9400M
MacBook 5,1

Roasted

April 13th, 2010, 05:46 AM

It's amazing what can change in a few days. I'm seeing some new things with the notification system. It's as if it's coming to life now.

But... *ahem*... where's the dock-like functionality at? :P

NightwishFan

April 13th, 2010, 06:10 AM

Yes the shell is coming out of its shell so to speak.:confused: I cannot seem to get empathy to use its own windows and not the notification ones though. I will have to say anyone who has not tried the ricotz give it a go. It is still months away from final too. I really am hoping they give it some configuration.

Merk42

April 13th, 2010, 03:27 PM

Anyone building from source having trouble lately?
I keep getting it complaining about Pango

Roasted

April 13th, 2010, 04:46 PM

So... big problem. Small problem, but to me a big problem. When I'm on regular Gnome, I swear by the hold-super-key-down + scroll in/out with scroll wheel for zooming. It's a huge help with showing people things, presentations, etc.

With Gnome Shell, I can't do that because of the binding with the super key. Is there any way I can bind another key to it, so I cant alt + scroll in/out with scroll wheel?

godhika

April 13th, 2010, 06:55 PM

I think the keybinding can be changed in the compizconfig settings manager under the option advanced zoom settings.

uBeer

April 13th, 2010, 07:14 PM

I think the keybinding can be changed in the compizconfig settings manager under the option advanced zoom settings.

Not when you're using Gnome shell instead of compiz...

Roasted

April 13th, 2010, 07:47 PM

I think the keybinding can be changed in the compizconfig settings manager under the option advanced zoom settings.

But if compiz isn't compatible with gnome shell, and gnome shell is taking away my beloved zoom feature, how can this feature be utilized with gnome shell?

EDIT - Well I didn't realize you could do it through keyboard shortcuts in the regular gnome, however it doesn't seem as if I can bind my scroll wheel to it... meh.

uBeer

April 13th, 2010, 08:33 PM

But if compiz isn't compatible with gnome shell, and gnome shell is taking away my beloved zoom feature, how can this feature be utilized with gnome shell?

EDIT - Well I didn't realize you could do it through keyboard shortcuts in the regular gnome, however it doesn't seem as if I can bind my scroll wheel to it... meh.

This is definitely a feature worth mentioning somewhere on the mailing lists, as it is quite useful. It is probably not that hard to implement.

ranch hand

April 13th, 2010, 08:57 PM

Does pressing Ctrl and hitting + work in GS?

Directive 4

April 17th, 2010, 06:36 PM

on my,

i think gnome may have just jumped the shark.

the frequently accessed overview may be the cause of frequently accessed swear words.

In addition to making workspaces more intuitive gnome shell flys pigs

it just doesn't work with the way i do,

cariboo907

April 17th, 2010, 10:04 PM

ranch hand

April 17th, 2010, 10:08 PM

Could you explain in plain English what it is you're trying to say.
What an excellent idea.

sgage

April 17th, 2010, 10:16 PM

Allow me to translate:

"I don't like Gnome-shell".

Directive 4

April 17th, 2010, 10:53 PM

Allow me to translate:

"I don't like Gnome-shell".

very good sgage, =D>

i would of thought you other 2 could of figured that out on your own.

oh well, you can maybe get a job on the gnome shell dev team instead:biggrin:

ranch hand

April 17th, 2010, 11:03 PM

There are a lot of people who are not native english speakers here on the forums. There is such things as courtesy and respect.

I do agree that GS, as it is, doesn't agree with me either.

Directive 4

April 17th, 2010, 11:10 PM

so in plain english, here's what i was trying to explain

jumped the shark is a well known idiom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiom) used to describe the moment of downturn for a previously successful enterprise. The phrase was originally used to denote the point in a television program (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_program)'s history where the plot spins off into absurd story lines or unlikely characterizations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumping_the_shark

ranch hand

April 17th, 2010, 11:20 PM

That is nice.

I am an English speaker (well, really agricultural American). I have actually never heard that phrase before but it was plain enough for me to understand. It could be that if I were to actually watch TV I would know about it.

TV and MS products are a couple of things I try to avoid.

ronacc

April 17th, 2010, 11:21 PM

as do most of us who hang out here .:lolflag:

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 12:19 AM

yea, those gnome devs really nuked the fridge on this one.

seeker5528

April 18th, 2010, 12:19 AM

It could be that if I were to actually watch TV I would know about it.

"Jump the shark" is a fairly commonly used phrase, don't know about outside the US. In urban areas you may be as likely to hear somebody use the phrase as to hear it used on TV, but even in urban areas I expect it's not so widely used that you would expect everyone to know it.

Later, Seeker

ranch hand

April 18th, 2010, 12:22 AM

Urban area? I think I have heard the phrase.

Actually there is one about 175 miles from here.

NightwishFan

April 18th, 2010, 12:25 AM

I would not count the chickens until they hatched. :lolflag:

My point is, of course, they may make it work yet, still a good amount of time to go. I suppose feedback would be welcome. They will not know what we like or do not without our input. I plan on joining the IRC and Mailing List.

ranch hand

April 18th, 2010, 12:28 AM

That is a good idea. I think that they, currently, are not aware that there are folks that do not, primarily, use the box for "gossip and giggles" (entertainment and "social networking".

x-shaney-x

April 18th, 2010, 12:49 AM

The big problem I have with gnome shell is the veering away from a taskbar.
Fair enough, the taskbar but it's just a few pixels high and you can just put it onto one panel with the main menu and that.

I love the way I can be browsing or whatever and simply click straight to the window I want. I don't want to have to do two clicks to do the same thing, I don't want to have to use keyboard shortcuts to bring up an app switcher.
I don't quite understand why some people are hell bent on removing the taskbar.

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 01:01 AM

That is a good idea. I think that they, currently, are not aware that there are folks that do not, primarily, use the box for "gossip and giggles" (entertainment and "social networking".

yes, i agree with this, seems that everything these days just wants to treat you as a content consumer. while gnome shell makes it easier to consume content, imho it makes it harder to work.

when i'm working my frequently accessed overview is in my brain, i don't need this thing poping up all the time. normaly when i work i have one workspace for latex, one for information, one for web research and one for time out. writing a report i want to switch to another workspace or to a different tab, now they want to make it 2 clicks instead of one, what? and alt tab, sorry, it don't cut it.
"Activities" then workspace, nah.

i can see why they want to "removes from view the options that are only used momentarily and are not related to the current application"

but i need to use many applications at the same time. and this extra layer seems to be a case of adding complexity for it's own sake.

so i guess when it comes to gnome shell,

i'm out.

ranch hand

April 18th, 2010, 01:18 AM

I usually have 6 dedicated workspaces in use (only 3 right now). It is fast and easy. I like it.

I think they could make GS work as well but they will need to use some of that wasted space on the panel for things folks actually use.

A menu for literate folks would be nice too.

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 02:04 AM

yea, it seems like someone's really happy with there own personal setup and can't see why everyone don't love it.

seeker5528

April 18th, 2010, 02:11 AM

A menu for literate folks would be nice too.

I probably would have said 'for us 'spatially challenged' folk'.

Aside from the issue of excessive scrolling, I have the same issue with the menu in Gnome Shell as I do with big blocks of text with no spaces or indentations and desktops with excessive amounts of icons.

It's hard for my brain to process. :rolleyes:

Later, Seeker

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 02:41 AM

yea for the idea of "reducing distractions" to the barest minimum

to result in things like this is crazy....

i mean, where do you start?

ranch hand

April 18th, 2010, 02:48 AM

I would say that would be real good for those trained to use cash registers with no numbers but a bunch of pictures on them.

I thing that is the target user group. The ones on the 1D10T list.

Kenny_Strawn

April 18th, 2010, 03:02 AM

Here's what I have for GNOME Shell:

153604

Basically the default theme with a few things edited. For more information, here's my /usr/share/gnome-shell/theme/gnome-shell.css (the lines edited are in red):

/* Copyright 2009, Red Hat, Inc.
*
* Portions adapted from Mx's data/style/default.css
* Copyright 2009 Intel Corporation
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
* under the terms and conditions of the GNU Lesser General Public License,
* version 2.1, as published by the Free Software Foundation.
*
* This program is distributed in the hope it will be useful, but WITHOUT ANY
* WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS
* FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU Lesser General Public License for
* more details.
*
* You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public License
* along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software Foundation,
* Inc., 51 Franklin St - Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA.
*/

.shell-link {
color: #0000ff;
text-decoration: underline;
}

.shell-link:hover {
color: #0000e0;
}

.label-shadow {
color: rgba(0,0,0,0.5);
}

StScrollBar
{
padding: 0px;
}

StScrollView
{
scrollbar-width: 16px;
scrollbar-height: 16px;
}

StScrollView > .top-shadow
{
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: #111111;
background-gradient-end: rgba(17, 17, 17, 0);
height: 30px;
}

StScrollView > .bottom-shadow
{
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: rgba(17, 17, 17, 0);
background-gradient-end: #111111;
height: 30px;
}

StScrollBar {
background-color: #080808;
border: 1px solid #2d2d2d;
border-radius: 8px;
}

StScrollBar StButton#vhandle
{
background-image: url("scroll-vhandle.svg");
background-color: #252525;
border: 1px solid #080808;
border-radius: 8px;
}

StScrollBar StButton#hhandle
{
background-image: url("scroll-hhandle.svg");
background-color: #252525;
border: 1px solid #080808;
border-radius: 8px;
}

StScrollBar StButton#hhandle:hover,
StScrollBar StButton#vhandle:hover
{
background-color: #292929;
}

StTooltip {
border: 1px solid rgba(79,111,173,0.9);
border-radius: 5px;
padding: 4px;
background-color: rgba(79,111,173,0.9);
color: #ffffff;
}

/* Panel */

#panel {
color: #ffffff;
font-size: 16px;
background-color: rgba(0,0,0,0.5);
border-bottom: 1px solid #1f1f1f;
}

#panelLeft, #panelCenter, #panelRight {
spacing: 4px;
font-weight: bold;
}

#panelLeft {
padding-right: 4px;
}

#panelRight {
padding-left: 4px;
}

#appMenu {
}

.panel-button {
padding: 4px 12px 3px;
border-radius: 5px;
border-radius-bottomleft: 0px;
border-radius-bottomright: 0px;
font: 16px sans-serif;
font-weight: bold;
}

.panel-button:active, .panel-button:checked, .panel-button:pressed {
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: #3c3c3c;
background-gradient-end: #131313;
}

#panelActivities {
border-radius-topleft: 0px;
}

#panelStatus {
border-radius-topright: 0px;
}

#statusMenu {
spacing: 4px;
}

#statusTray {
spacing: 14px;
}

#statusTray:compact {
spacing: 8px;
}

/* Overview */

.overview {
background-color: rgba(0,0,0,0.5);
}

.info-bar {
color: #fff;
font-size: 14px;
spacing: 20px;
}

.info-bar-link-button {
background-color: #2d2d2d;
padding: 2px 14px;
border-radius: 10px;
border: 1px solid #181818;
}

.info-bar-link-button:hover {
border: 1px solid #666666;
}

.new-workspace-area {
border: 2px solid rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.8);
border-radius: 10px;
background-color: #111;
}

.new-workspace-area-internal {
background-gradient-direction: horizontal;
background-gradient-start: rgba(16, 16, 16, 0);
background-gradient-end: rgba(16, 16, 16, 1.0);
background-image: url("move-window-on-new.svg");
}

.new-workspace-area:hover {
border: 2px solid rgba(255, 255, 255, 1.0);
background-gradient-direction: horizontal;
background-gradient-start: rgba(130, 130, 130, 0.9);
background-gradient-end: rgba(16, 16, 16, 0.9);
}

.left-workspaces-shadow {
background-gradient-direction: horizontal;
background-gradient-start: rgba(16, 16, 16, 1.0);
background-gradient-end: rgba(16, 16, 16, 0.0);
}

.right-workspaces-shadow {
background-gradient-direction: horizontal;
background-gradient-end: rgba(16, 16, 16, 1.0);
background-gradient-start: rgba(16, 16, 16, 0);
}

.workspaces {
color: white;
}

.workspaces.single {
spacing: 25px;
}

.workspaces.mosaic {
spacing: 15px;
}

.workspaces-bar {
height: 48px;
}

.workspaces-bar {
spacing: 5px;
}

.workspace-indicator {
width: 24px;
height: 16px;
background: rgba(155,155,155,0.8);
border-spacing: 16px;
}

.workspace-indicator.active {
background: rgba(255,255,255,0.8);
}

.window-caption {
background: rgba(0,0,0,0.8);
border: 1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.40);
border-radius: 10px;
font-size: 12px;
padding: 2px 8px;
-shell-caption-spacing: 4px;
}

.window-close {
background-image: url("close-window.svg");
height: 24px;
width: 24px;
-st-shadow: -2px 2px 6px rgba(0,0,0,0.5);
-shell-close-overlap: 16px;
}

.single-view-controls {
padding: 0px 15px;
}

.workspace-controls {
width: 24px;
height: 16px;
}

.workspace-controls.add {
background-image: url("add-workspace.svg");
}

.workspace-controls.remove {
background-image: url("remove-workspace.svg");
}

.workspace-controls.switch-single {
background-image: url("single-view.svg");
}

.workspace-controls.switch-mosaic {
background-image: url("mosaic-view.svg");
}

.workspace-controls.switch-single:checked {
background-image: url("single-view-active.svg");
}

.workspace-controls.switch-mosaic:checked {
background-image: url("mosaic-view-active.svg");
}

#SwitchScroll {
height: 14px;
}

#SwitchScroll #hhandle {
border-radius: 7px;
}

/* Dash */

#dash {
color: #5f5f5f;
font-size: 12px;
padding: 0px 14px;
}

#dashSections {
spacing: 12px;
}

#searchEntry {
padding: 4px;
border-radius: 4px;
color: #a8a8a8;
border: 1px solid #565656;
background-color: #404040;
caret-color: #fff;
caret-size: 1px;
height: 16px;
}

#searchEntry:focus {
color: #545454;
border: 1px solid #3a3a3a;
background-color: #e8e8e8;
caret-color: #545454;
}

#searchEntry:hover {
border: 1px solid #767676;
}

.dash-section {
spacing: 8px;
}

.section-header {
}

.section-header-inner {
spacing: 4px;
}

.section-text-content {
padding: 4px 0px;
}

.section-header-back {
padding: 0px 4px 0px 0px;
border-right: 1px solid #262626;
}

.section-header-back-image {
background-image: url("section-back.svg");
width: 12px;
height: 16px;
}

.section-count {
}

.dash-section-content {
color: #ffffff;
spacing: 8px;
}

.more-link {
}

.more-link-expander {
background-image: url("section-more.svg");
width: 9px;
height: 9px;
}

.more-link-expander.open {
background-image: url("section-more-open.svg");
width: 9px;
height: 9px;
}

.dash-pane {
border-radius: 10px;
background-color: #111111;
border: 2px solid #868686;
color: #ffffff;
padding: 30px 10px 10px 20px;
}

.dash-search-section-header {
padding: 6px 0px;
spacing: 4px;
}

.dash-search-section-results {
color: #ffffff;
}

.dash-search-section-list-results {
spacing: 4px;
}

.dash-search-result-content {
padding: 3px;
}

.dash-search-result-content:selected {
padding: 2px;
border: 1px solid #5c5c5c;
border-radius: 2px;
background-color: #1e1e1e;
}

.dash-results-container {
spacing: 4px;
}

/* GenericDisplay */

.generic-display-container {
spacing: 4px;
}

.generic-display-item {
height: 50px;
border-radius: 4px;
color: #ffffff;
font-size: 14px;
spacing: 4px;
}

.generic-display-item:selected {
background-color: rgba(79,111,173,0.66);
}

.generic-display-item-text {
spacing: 4px;
}

.generic-display-item-description {
font-size: 12px;
color: #bababa;
}

.generic-display-details {
font-size: 14px;
color: #ffffff;
}

.generic-display-details-name {
font-weight: bold;
}

/* Apps */

.overview-pane {
width: 440px;
}

#dashAppWell {
spacing: 6px;
-shell-grid-item-size: 70px;
}

.all-app {
border-radius: 10px;
background-color: rgba(0,0,0,0.5);
border: 2px solid #868686;
color: #ffffff;
}

.all-app-controls-panel {
height: 30px;
}

.all-app-scroll-view {
padding-right: 10px;
padding-left: 10px;
padding-bottom: 10px;
}

.app-well-app {
border: 1px solid #181818;
border-radius: 4px;
padding: 2px;
width: 70px;
height: 70px;
font-size: 10px;
}

.app-well-app.running {
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: #3d3d3d;
background-gradient-end: #181818;
}

.app-well-app.selected {
border: 1px solid #666666;
}

.app-well-app:hover {
border: 1px solid #666666;
}

.app-well-app:active {
background-color: #1e1e1e;
border: 1px solid #5f5f5f;
}

.app-well-menu {
border: 1px solid #5f5f5f;
border-radius: 4px;
padding: 4px;
background-color: rgba(0,0,0,0.9);
color: #ffffff;
spacing: 4px;
}

.app-well-menu-arrow {
border-color: #5f5f5f;
color: rgba(0,0,0,0.9);
width: 12px;
}

.app-well-menu-item:hover {
background-color: #1e1e1e;
}

.app-well-menu-separator {
padding-top: 1px;
border-bottom: 1px solid #5f5f5f;
height: 1px;
}

/* Places */

.places-section {
spacing-columns: 4px;
spacing-rows: 4px;
}

.places-item-box {
spacing: 4px;
}

.places-item {
border-radius: 4px;
padding: 2px;
border: 1px solid #181818;
}

.places-item:hover {
border: 1px solid #666666;
}

/* Recent items */

.recent-docs-item-box {
spacing: 4px;
}

.recent-docs-item {
border-radius: 4px;
padding: 2px;
border: 1px solid #181818;
}

.recent-docs-item:hover {
border: 1px solid #666666;
}

/* LookingGlass */

#LookingGlassDialog
{
background-color: rgba(0,0,0,0.85);
spacing: 4px;
padding: 4px;
border: 1px solid rgba(0,0,172,0.85);
border-radius: 4px;

color: #88ff66;
}

#LookingGlassDialog > #Toolbar
{
border: 1px solid grey;
border-radius: 4px;
}

#LookingGlassDialog .labels {
spacing: 4px;
}

#LookingGlassDialog .notebook-tab {
padding: 2px;
}

#LookingGlassDialog .notebook-tab:selected {
border: 1px solid #88ff66;
padding: 1px;
}

#LookingGlassDialog StLabel
{
color: #88ff66;
}

#LookingGlassDialog StEntry
{
color: #88ff66;
}

#LookingGlassDialog StBoxLayout#EvalBox
{
padding: 4px;
spacing: 4px;
}

#LookingGlassDialog StBoxLayout#ResultsArea
{
spacing: 4px;
}

#lookingGlassExtensions {
padding: 4px;
}

.lg-extension-list {
padding: 4px;
spacing: 6px;
}

.lg-extension {
border: 1px solid #6f6f6f;
border-radius: 4px;
padding: 4px;
}

.lg-extension-name {
font-weight: bold;
}

.lg-extension-actions {
spacing: 6px;
}

/* Calendar popup */

#calendarPopup {
border-radius: 5px;
background: rgba(0,0,0,0.9);
border: 1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.45);
color: white;
background-color: rgba(0,0,0,0.5);
}

#calendarPopup .calendar {
padding: 10px;
}

.calendar {
spacing-rows: 5px;
spacing-columns: 3px;
}

.calendar-change-month {
padding: 2px;
}

.calendar-change-month:hover {
background: #314a6c;
border-radius: 5px;
}

.calendar-change-month:active {
background: #213050;
border-radius: 5px;
}

.calendar-day {
padding: 1px 2px;
}

.calendar-today {
font-weight: bold;
background: #ffffff;
color: black;
border-radius: 5px;
}

.calendar-other-month-day {
color: #cccccc;
}

/* Message Tray */
#message-tray {
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: rgba(0,0,0,0.01);
background-gradient-end: rgba(0,0,0,0.95);
height: 28px;
}

#notification {
font-size: 16px;
border-radius: 5px 5px 0px 0px;
/* FIXME: currently StWidget can only draw non-uniform corners
* if the background is a gradient. So, we draw a gradient
* from black to black...
*/
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: rgba(0,0,0,0.9);
background-gradient-end: rgba(0,0,0,0.9);
color: white;
padding: 2px 10px 10px 10px;
spacing-rows: 5px;
spacing-columns: 10px;
max-width: 40em;
}

#summary-notification-bin #notification {
/* message-tray.height + notification.padding-bottom */
padding-bottom: 38px;
}

#notification-scrollview {
max-height: 10em;
}

#notification-scrollview > .top-shadow, #notification-scrollview > .bottom-shadow {
height: 1em;
}

#notification-body {
spacing: 5px;
}

#notification-actions {
spacing: 5px;
}

.notification-button {
border: 2px rgba(0,0,0,0.0);
border-radius: 5px;
padding: 5px;
background: #c0c0c0;
color: black;
font-weight: bold;
}

.notification-button:hover {
border: 2px solid white;
}

.notification-button:active {
border: 2px solid white;
background: #808080;
}

.chat-received {
background-gradient-direction: horizontal;
background-gradient-start: #606060;
background-gradient-end: #000000;

min-width: 20em;
}

.chat-sent {
background-gradient-direction: horizontal;
background-gradient-start: #000000;
background-gradient-end: #606060;
}

.chat-response {
border: 1px solid white;
}

/* The spacing and padding on the summary is tricky; we want to keep
* the icons from touching each other or the edges of the screen, but
* we also want them to be "Fitts"-y with respect to the edges, so the
* summary area's bottom and right padding must actually be part of
* the icons. However, we can't put *all* of the padding into the
* icons, because then the summary would be 0x0 when there were no
* icons in it, and so you wouldn't be able to hover over it to
* activate it.
*
* The padding-right on the non-rightmost icons is noticeable and
* slightly annoying. If StBoxLayout implemented the ":last-child"
* pseudo-class we could fix that...
*/
#summary-mode {
spacing: 6px;
padding: 2px 0px 0px 4px;
}

.summary-icon {
padding: 0px 4px 2px 0px;
}

/* App Switcher */
#altTabPopup {
padding: 8px;
spacing: 16px;
}

.switcher-list {
background: rgba(0,0,0,0.8);
border: 1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.40);
border-radius: 8px;
padding: 18px;

font: 12px sans-serif;
color: white;
}

.switcher-list-item-container {
spacing: 8px;
}

.thumbnail-scroll-gradient-left {
background-gradient-direction: horizontal;
background-gradient-start: rgba(51, 51, 51, 1.0);
background-gradient-end: rgba(51, 51, 51, 0);
border-radius: 8px;
width: 60px;
}

.thumbnail-scroll-gradient-right {
background-gradient-direction: horizontal;
background-gradient-start: rgba(51, 51, 51, 0);
background-gradient-end: rgba(51, 51, 51, 1.0);
border-radius: 8px;
width: 60px;
}

.switcher-list .item-box {
padding: 8px;
border-radius: 4px;
}

.switcher-list .thumbnail-box {
padding: 2px;
spacing: 4px;
}

.switcher-list .thumbnail {
width: 256px;
}

.switcher-list .outlined-item-box {
padding: 6px;
border: 2px solid rgba(85,85,85,1.0);
border-radius: 4px;
}

.switcher-list .selected-item-box {
padding: 8px;
border-radius: 4px;
background: rgba(255,255,255,0.33);
}

.switcher-list .separator {
width: 1px;
background: rgba(255,255,255,0.33);
}

.ripple-box {
width: 52px;
height: 52px;
background-image: url("corner-ripple.png");
}

.switcher-arrow {
border-color: rgba(0,0,0,0);
color: #808080;
}

.switcher-arrow:highlighted {
border-color: rgba(0,0,0,0);
color: white;
}

/* Workspace Switcher */
.workspace-switcher-container {
background: rgba(0,0,0,0.8);
border: 1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.40);
border-radius: 8px;
padding: 12px;
}

.workspace-switcher {
background: transparent;
border: 0px;
border-radius: 0px;
padding: 4px;
spacing: 4.5px;
}

.ws-switcher-active-left {
height: 98px;
border: 0px;
background: rgba(255,255,255,0.5);
background-image: url("ws-switch-arrow-left.svg");
border-radius: 4px;
}

.ws-switcher-active-right {
height: 98px;
border: 0px;
background: rgba(255,255,255,0.5);
background-image: url("ws-switch-arrow-right.svg");
border-radius: 4px;
}

.ws-switcher-box {
height: 96px;
border: 2px solid rgba(85,85,85,0.5);
background: transparent;
border-radius: 4px;
}

/* Run Dialog */
.run-dialog-label {
font: 12px sans-serif;
color: white;
}

.run-dialog-error-icon {
background-image: url("dialog-error.svg");
width: 36px;
height: 36px;
}

.run-dialog-error-label {
font: 16px sans-serif;
color: white;
}

.run-dialog-entry {
font: 14px sans-serif;
font-weight: bold;
width: 320px;
color: white;
}

.run-dialog {
padding: 8px;
border: 1px solid rgba(128,128,128,0.40);
border-radius: 4px;
background: rgba(0,0,0,0.8);
}

.lightbox {
background-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.27);
}

As you can see, those four edits make four integral parts of GNOME Shell - the panel, the overview, the All Apps menu, and the Calendar Popup - transparent with RGBA.

Reiger

April 18th, 2010, 03:27 AM

I am not sure about GS, mainly because I am not really seeing what -really- you get out of it. I see how you could use it, although admittedly I am not a Gnome user by choice as I prefer KDE and when I fiddled with the Canonical supplied version of GS, I had the following set up:

XFCE + GS + KDE supplied nepomuk. But I didn't get *any* kind of application menu, or last used documents or whatever and the search function simply did not work at all either.

Needless to say when the inevitable wipe occurred I didn't bother with GS or Gnome.

For me, I think the best approach is to wait until some distribution deems GS sufficiently stable to stick on a Live environment. Then see if it works any better for me than Alt+F2, plus a few Desktop effects on KDE.

k3lt01

April 18th, 2010, 03:44 AM

now they want to make it 2 clicks instead of one, what? and alt tab, sorry, it don't cut it.
"Activities" then workspace, nah. That's not correct and it shows you haven't used it properly. The hot corner you don't have to click so it is actually exactly the same as Gnome-Panels you slide to the appropriate spot and then click what you want. 1 click and the jobs done in both G-S and Panels.

cariboo907

April 18th, 2010, 04:16 AM

I'm a little late to the conversation, I know what "jump the shark" means, this:

In addition to making workspaces more intuitive gnome shell flys pigs

was the part I was wondering about.

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 04:35 AM

That's not correct and it shows you haven't used it properly. The hot corner you don't have to click so it is actually exactly the same as Gnome-Panels you slide to the appropriate spot and then click what you want. 1 click and the jobs done in both G-S and Panels.

ok, my bad, you don't click, you move the mouse up there then move the mouse to the workspace you want and click, still 2 actions instead of one. on my setup i move the mouse over the workspace i want and click, one action

I'm a little late to the conversation, I know what "jump the shark" means, this:

Quote:
In addition to making workspaces more intuitive gnome shell flys pigs

was the part I was wondering about.

ok A flying pig is an adynaton (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adynaton), that is a figure of speech (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figure_of_speech) in the form of hyperbole (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole) taken to such extreme lengths as to suggest a complete impossibility. Thus the popular saying that something will happen "when pigs fly" or "when pigs have wings" means that the thing is an impossibility.

as in gnome shell will make workspaces more intuitive "when pigs fly"

cariboo907

April 18th, 2010, 04:40 AM

And here I thought it had something to do with Pink Floyd. :)

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 04:44 AM

pink floyd are good,

:guitar:

ok back to gnome shell,

imho the Activities button

and the way it presents you with, well, everthing is like picture 1,

much better is picture 2,

k3lt01

April 18th, 2010, 05:16 AM

ok, my bad, you don't click, you move the mouse up there then move the mouse to the workspace you want and click, still 2 actions instead of one. on my setup i move the mouse over the workspace i want and click, one actionYou are quiet good with colourful speech, not bad language just overly metaphorical, yet accuracy isn't one of your fortes.

Having used G-S quite extensively over the last few months I don't find the mouse movement to be 2 separate actions. I "swing" (trying to be colourful :lolflag:) the mouse (or in the case of my laptop, slide my thumb on the touchpad) in a circular motion, it's 1 movement, then I click. So 2 movements is all I need.

I understand some won't and don't like G-S but I suppose in PC land (still trying to be colourful) it's each to his/her own.

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 05:35 AM

You are quiet good with colourful speech, not bad language just overly metaphorical, yet accuracy isn't one of your fortes.

Having used G-S quite extensively over the last few months I don't find the mouse movement to be 2 separate actions. I "swing" (trying to be colourful :lolflag:) the mouse (or in the case of my laptop, slide my thumb on the touchpad) in a circular motion, it's 1 movement, then I click. So 2 movements is all I need.

I understand some won't and don't like G-S but I suppose in PC land (still trying to be colourful) it's each to his/her own.

yea, so this idea is being pushed a lot, but i just don't buy it.

i'm quoting here from http://live.gnome.org/GnomeShell/Tour

"The hot corner is a fast and easy way to get to the frequently accessed overview."

(imho 1 action)

more quotes
"the view of what is on all workspaces allows the user to pick a window to switch to in a single step regardless of whether it is located on the same or different workspace as the user's previous activity."

so, another single step from the activities screen which was a step to get to.

"Similarly, single step switching is available in the Alt+Tab dialog which shows applications open on all workspaces."

again, this idea of it being a single step, after alt + tab, which of course makes 2 steps.

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 06:17 AM

more feedback.

i guess it all comes down to how people work, or play...

i work by taking information from papers and the web and puting it into a txt file for later latex'in, i have many web pages open, many research papers open and information needs to be copied and pasted (fiqures, spelling as i'm really bad at that) so the idea of 1 task or activity (i,e writing a report) only requiring one application for me doesn't work.

certain points have to be looked into before continuing, so i change to workspace web, look about. or reread a paper etc. then write what i want, for me this is all one task.

i allways use the same order of the 4 workspaces for the different sections, (latex, info, web, etc) all coming together to make the task.
so the frequent overview is a bit of a waste for me

maybe others work different and i have to say, gnome has room for change but one of the reasons i like it is because it's simple.

d3v1150m471c

April 18th, 2010, 06:24 AM

Gnome shell is a project with the goal of making the most hideous desktop environment ever. Second only to windows xp.

k3lt01

April 18th, 2010, 06:42 AM

yea, so this idea is being pushed a lot, but i just don't buy it.You don't have to buy it, it's free. Have your opinion just understand that not everyone agrees with you.

I myself know how many movements I make for each action just like you know how many movements you make for each action. I suppose there will be some who aren't as dexterous, nimble, and nubile as me :P . The important thing to understand is we are all different.

P.S. Practice makes perfect.

NoVista

April 18th, 2010, 07:32 AM

The thumbnail Directive 4 posted above ..
might make a good logo for Gnome Shell :(

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 12:17 PM

You don't have to buy it, it's free. Have your opinion just understand that not everyone agrees with you.

I myself know how many movements I make for each action just like you know how many movements you make for each action. I suppose there will be some who aren't as dexterous, nimble, and nubile as me :P . The important thing to understand is we are all different.

P.S. Practice makes perfect.

yea, that's good, cause i won't be.

with your logic i could say firin up the cube then spinin to the workspace i want is one action,

it is however one action i don't take, nice to be able to mind, and we've all did it, but every time i want to switch. no. if i want to switch, i do. like opening a can of coke, you can't go half way there and stop... it's open, or it's not.

seems to me like that paperclip from ms word has achieved self realization and decided that instead of annoying windows users it's going to take down gnome, and by proxy, ubuntu.

i think all gnome shell dev's should have to undertake a Captcha :lolflag:

UpSignal

April 18th, 2010, 12:37 PM

Hey guys, just tested out gnome shell on lucid. pretty awesome, i hope they implement it on 10.10, because it's a jump to the future :D. anyway, it's pretty fast, however there's one bug that annoys me. At least it looks like a bug. First time i boot with shell, everything was cool. But next times, my gnome-volume applet was missing. also the mail was gonne from the tray. Only wireless left.

btw, about the minimize and close buttons... i hate them on the right side. lol...i'm so addicted to have them on the left, can't stand it :D

k3lt01

April 18th, 2010, 12:42 PM

yea, that's good, cause i won't be.

with your logic i could say firin up the cube then spinin to the workspace i want is one action,

it is however one action i don't take, nice to be able to mind, and we've all did it, but every time i want to switch. no. if i want to switch, i do. like opening a can of coke, you can't go half way there and stop... it's open, or it's not.

seems to me like that paperclip from ms word has achieved self realization and decided that instead of annoying windows users it's going to take down gnome, and by proxy, ubuntu.

i think all gnome shell dev's should have to undertake a Captcha :lolflag:
I must be having a bad day I think.

Very little of that makes any sense.

You don't like G-S, that's nice, we understand although someone felt the need to translate for you.

If you had been keeping up with Gnome you would know and understand that you will still be able to use 2.x (Gnome-Panels) if you want to. So there is no need to worry about Ubuntu's future because of G-S.

Now you have expressed your opinion is it ok if people who do like it get back to discussing it without colourfully metaphorical speech popping up every second reply telling us how crap something we like is? Some of us are trying to assist the devs make it better.

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 01:13 PM

ranch hand

April 18th, 2010, 04:04 PM

oh sorry, didn't realise that discussion was limited to people of a certain viewpoint.:rolleyes:

If you had been keeping up with what many people are saying it's the new members who won't know about gnome 2.

Never be so successful that no one will ever tell you the truth, even (or especially) in a situation where hearing the truth is uncongenial but crucial.
.
.
.
.
This is not limitted, There are several of us that differ on the merits and de-merits of GS.

This is not however one of the threads in Community Discussions where, appearently, the one who screams the loudest wins.

The idea here is to share information (and opinion) in a useful manner. Repeating the same thing, in a shrill manner, gets very old, very quickly.

This is a fast changing project, no one has any real idea of the final product, hollering about the doom of gnome and Ubuntu based on that is also a little silly.

If you have read the entire thread you will see many differing opinions on here. You will also see civility and people with very different opinions helping one another with basic problems in using, and modifying a pre release desktop.

Join in, read the thread, there is no need to make it longer with bickering. There is a mailing list and so forth if you want to express your opinion to folks that actually have some say over what does and does not go into GS.

HolidayQueen

April 18th, 2010, 04:56 PM

Anyone who doesn't use workspaces and doesn't appreciate his recent documents visible to everyone who passes by will find most of shell's features useless, and since it takes away compiz and gnome-panel applets, they'll further concluded that it's another layer to gnome that doesn't add anything for them and takes quite a few things away.

Though ive already stated my opinions, im relieved to see i'm not the only who feels this is an aberration of gnome.

What scares me the most is if this is imposed as of gnome 3, i'll be forced to either stick with old gnome or go xfce.

Uncle Spellbinder

April 18th, 2010, 05:20 PM

ranch hand

April 18th, 2010, 05:36 PM

I am not sure about the workspaces thing in the last 2 posts at all. I use 6 just about full all the time.

I have found that dealing with work spaces in GS very cumbersome and awkward compared to using the current set up.

Lubuntu, by the way is looking pretty good. I definitely like pcmanfs better than thunar.

Uncle Spellbinder

April 18th, 2010, 05:42 PM

Lubuntu, by the way is looking pretty good. I definitely like pcmanfs better than thunar.
Indeed. The only thing lacking is thumbnail generation for videos. A showstopper for me.

Sorry to take the thread off topic........

Directive 4

April 18th, 2010, 06:07 PM

yea, i think they've got there definition of an activity wrong,

seems to be like for them one activity is one application,

but, for me, that's not true.

oh, and here some compare pictures from some iphone ideas

cariboo907

April 18th, 2010, 07:09 PM

This discussion should really be in a separate thread, as Ranch Hand said this is a technical thread to help solve gnome-shell problems. If you feel the need to continue this off topic discussion please start a thread in the appropriate place.

That being said I have a problem with virtualbox when ever I start an other os, it starts up under the overlay, intermittently. Sometimes it is on the desktop and other times I see nothing, but I do hear the start up sound when XP starts, clicking the show button does nothing. Has anyone else run into this problem.

HolidayQueen

April 18th, 2010, 07:54 PM

This discussion should really be in a separate thread, as Ranch Hand said this is a technical thread to help solve gnome-shell problems. If you feel the need to continue this off topic discussion please start a thread in the appropriate place.

I'd hate to get technical on you, but the thread is titled Gnome Shell, and not "Gnome Shell Technical Issues".

And since our comments do relate to Gnome Shell's functionality, i still don't see how they would not apply here.

cariboo907

April 18th, 2010, 09:55 PM

Most of the posts are personal opinion's so really, they don't belong here.

x-shaney-x

April 18th, 2010, 10:04 PM

Well any discussion does tend to be each person's opinion.
But I seem to be seeing more and more back-chatting and sniping at each other lately in these forums.
I feel like I'm back at the call of duty forums.

I think everyone needs to stop telling each other whether they are right or wrong and maybe concentrate on the actual "features" of GS.
Disagreeing is fine and natural and part of the discussion but disagreeing and telling the other party the are wrong to disagree is just leading to a thread lock.

Anyway, back on topic.
I can't help feeling the whole gnome-shell thing is an attempt to add a bit of "flashiness" to compete with KDE, MAC etc without actually wanting to make any major changes to gnome itself.

I dunno, if gnome shell remains an OPTION (or even default but with an option to change it) then I will never have a problem with it.
If it is forced upon me I will need to take a long hard look at things then.

bruce89

April 19th, 2010, 12:06 AM

Anyway, back on topic.
I can't help feeling the whole gnome-shell thing is an attempt to add a bit of "flashiness" to compete with KDE, MAC etc without actually wanting to make any major changes to gnome itself.

I think it's a pretty major change. Also, there are a hell of a lot of changes under the hood that people won't realise.

vininim

April 19th, 2010, 03:57 AM

Screen garbage with nouveau here, but I guess this is expected.

djchandler

April 19th, 2010, 04:44 AM

tanari

April 19th, 2010, 08:11 AM

why I can't install gnome-shell in lucid?

x-shaney-x

April 19th, 2010, 08:38 AM

Why is this thread in this forum? This is about a package that may be two releases away from being included.

Although I'm not sure where it should go, Lucid Lynx Testing and Discussion doesn't seem proper to me.

Wow, I thought the button controversy was overblown. I can't begin to grok this.

Well since it is included in the repos it is there to be used and tested so that makes it part of Lucid and so open for discussion.
I know what you're getting at but it is discussion and testing now that may well shape how it actually turns out in those two or so releases from now.
Much of the discussion is overblown but that is because people who really don't like it are maybe concerned they are going to be FORCED to use it.
The thing with the buttons was a bit overblown I would say because it is simply a default that can very easily be changed.

NightwishFan

April 19th, 2010, 09:01 AM

why I can't install gnome-shell in lucid?

If you have 3d accelerated hardware and can run Compiz; you can try the Gnome Shell. To get the older, more stable Gnome Shell click here:
apt://gnome-shell

One command to rule them all to install up-to-date Gnome Shell on Ubuntu:

sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ricotz/testing && sudo aptitude update && sudo aptitude install gnome-shell

HolidayQueen

April 19th, 2010, 02:54 PM

I can't help feeling the whole gnome-shell thing is an attempt to add a bit of "flashiness" to compete with KDE, MAC etc without actually wanting to make any major changes to gnome itself.

That pretty much hits it on the nose. Although im definately not a fan of KDE (even kde 4) a lot of gnome developers seem to be looking at it with envy. What's ironic is that their attempts to compete by reinventing gnome might just send a good chunk of gnome users to other DE's.

Merk42

April 19th, 2010, 03:08 PM

why I can't install gnome-shell in lucid?You can (or should be able to) I even mention Lucid in the first post

Why is this thread in this forum? This is about a package that may be two releases away from being included.

Although I'm not sure where it should go, Lucid Lynx Testing and Discussion doesn't seem proper to me.

Wow, I thought the button controversy was overblown. I can't begin to grok this.When I first wrote this thread, which I believe was one of the first threads for Lucid Lynx Testing and Discussion, it was before GNOME Shell had a release date. As such I thought GNOME Shell would be one of the things that Lucid might have as an option, though too early to tell. I'll make sure to try and bring it up at UDS if it's not already a topic.
Given its current release of September 2010, Ubuntu 10.10 may have it as an option.
I also figured the sort of people that would build/install/test alphas and betas of a new DE would be the sort of people that would build/install/test alphas and betas of Ubuntu.

ranch hand

April 19th, 2010, 03:13 PM

You can (or should be able to) I even mention Lucid in the first post

When I first wrote this thread, which I believe was one of the first threads for Lucid Lynx Testing and Discussion, it was before GNOME Shell had a release date. As such I thought GNOME Shell would be one of the things that Lucid might have as an option, though too early to tell. I'll make sure to try and bring it up at UDS if it's not already a topic.
Given its current release of September 2010, Ubuntu 10.10 may have it as an option.
I also figured the sort of people that would build/install/test alphas and betas of a new DE would be the sort of people that would build/install/test alphas and betas of Ubuntu.
What Merk is trying to say is that this is the right place for this because the folks that upgrade to the toolchain are the really adventuresome folks that are going to try this and stick with it even if they don't particularly like it.

Heck, it is kind of like politics, if you don't run it (vote) you gote no right to complain about the out come.

seeker5528

April 19th, 2010, 11:06 PM

yea, i think they've got there definition of an activity wrong,

seems to be like for them one activity is one application,

but, for me, that's not true.

It would take some significant work to make it make sense to think of an activity any other way.

A way to create a launcher that will launch multiple applications as a group, single task item for the group, ability to move the group of applications to another workspace, close the group down all at once, etc....

Unless you are one of those thinking what gnome-shell currently calls a workspace should have been activity and what gnome-shell calls an activity should be called something else?

Or something else?

Later, Seeker

UpSignal

April 19th, 2010, 11:35 PM

guys, i have my shell installed from the source, to make sure i'm updated. anyway, it works great, however i tried to add it as my default manager. I went to gconf-editor Desktop/gnome/sessions/requiredcomponents/
and in window manager i deleted "metacity" and replaced with "gnome-shell".
i reboot the computer and all the stuff was messed, seemed to have both running. neither matacity or shell runned well. had to revert to metacity again.

Don't know if this matters, when i first installed gnome shell, it was from their repos (and it worked replacing on gconf). today i used synaptic to remove it, and installed it again building from source. and now can't add it to startup

Merk42

April 19th, 2010, 11:45 PM

seeker5528

April 19th, 2010, 11:51 PM

Don't know if this matters, when i first installed gnome shell, it was from their repos (and it worked replacing on gconf). today i used synaptic to remove it, and installed it again building from source. and now can't add it to startup

Presumably, if you are installing from source, gnome-shell is not going to be in your path, so you have to specify the path where the executable is found with the executable '/path/to/gnome-shell' instead of instead of just the executable 'gnome-shell'.

Later, Seeker

Directive 4

April 20th, 2010, 12:23 AM

It would take some significant work to make it make sense to think of an activity any other way.

A way to create a launcher that will launch multiple applications as a group, single task item for the group, ability to move the group of applications to another workspace, close the group down all at once, etc....

Unless you are one of those thinking what gnome-shell currently calls a workspace should have been activity and what gnome-shell calls an activity should be called something else?

Or something else?

Later, Seeker

yea,

it's just for me one task (or activity) is lots of different applications, grouped by workspaces, all coming together to complete the task. i don't move applications to different workspaces, each group of apps has there own workspace,

as in browers, latex'in, pdf's and such, all of which together i call an activity.

but hey, i've just realised,

maybe what they are tryin to do is sort out the mess that is most peoples desktop, you know with random launchers everywhere.
(unlike most desktops i've seen mines 100% clean unless i plug in a usb stick)

and with the iphone gen coming throu, maybe they'll pull it off, but...

it's to late for me, i'm already 30 years old, need a walking stick, just want my phone to call people, and i want it to make a ringing sound.

ranch hand

April 20th, 2010, 12:42 AM

yea,

it's just for me one task (or activity) is lots of different applications, grouped by workspaces, all coming together to complete the task. i don't move applications to different workspaces, each group of apps has there own workspace,

as in browers, latex'in, pdf's and such, all of which together i call an activity.

but hey, i've just realised,

maybe what they are tryin to do is sort out the mess that is most peoples desktop, you know with random launchers everywhere.
(unlike most desktops i've seen mines 100% clean unless i plug in a usb stick)

and with the iphone gen coming throu, maybe they'll pull it off, but...

it's to late for me, i'm already 30 years old, need a walking stick, just want my phone to call people, and i want it to make a ringing sound.
My God you are getting so Old.

Just couldn't resist, my son is a good bit older than you are.

bruce89

April 20th, 2010, 01:03 AM

That pretty much hits it on the nose. Although im definately not a fan of KDE (even kde 4) a lot of gnome developers seem to be looking at it with envy. What's ironic is that their attempts to compete by reinventing gnome might just send a good chunk of gnome users to other DE's.

I'm pretty sure this is not the case at all. gnome-shell doesn't copy anything from anything that currently exists.

k3lt01

April 20th, 2010, 04:01 AM

My God you are getting so Old.

Just couldn't resist, my son is a good bit older than you are.I'm a good deal older than D4 is, lol.

D4, I understand your definition of Activity but I also think you have lumbered to much in it. What you have is a "task group" made up of more than 1 activity that are used together to facilitate the completion of a task.

cariboo907

April 20th, 2010, 06:27 AM

Does anyone else have the buttons on the right when running gnome-shell and on the left when running a normal desktop?

k3lt01

April 20th, 2010, 06:30 AM

Sorry Cariboo I'm running G-S on my Karmic desktop so it's all on the right side for me.

I'll go and update Lucid now and use G-S on that, hopefully it may work and if it does I'll report back.

Edit: I can't get G-S to work in Lucid on my laptop. G-S seems to be to resource hungry for such a miniscule machine.

thunderbox

April 20th, 2010, 06:43 AM

GS Ran almost perfectly on my Lucid Install. However some things did not work. Im not 100% sure if theya re becuase of GS, but they did stop working as soon as it was installed. I was unable to burn Audio CDs and Unable to open NetBeans. Apart from that It is awesome and i am still using it. It is very different to default gnome and thats why i like it. However Chaning the appearance of it would be awesome, Im going to investigate changing the styles and see if i can write an app to change everything.

ranch hand

April 20th, 2010, 01:22 PM

There are several themes available right here in this thread. I suggest getting a few so that you can see how it is done.

No sense in re inventing the wheel and many of them are very nice.

Merk42

April 20th, 2010, 01:55 PM

Does anyone else have the buttons on the right when running gnome-shell and on the left when running a normal desktop?

Yes, I believe it has to do with Mutter taking control of the button order instead of Metacity

Mblackwell

April 20th, 2010, 10:37 PM

Hmm I don't have that problem. Maybe it's related to themes?

Also to people who have a very specific idea or change, don't be afraid to file a bug (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=gnome-shell). Since there's a lot going on it may take awhile for you to see any response, and even longer to see any sort of action, but I have had things worked on (and partially implemented, like the notification summary on icon hover in the tray). Include mockups if you can, and don't be afraid to comment on other peoples' reports that you also agree with. The more responses a bug gets the more likely it is to be worked on swiftly.

4leite

April 21st, 2010, 05:25 AM

my buttons are on the right in lucid with mutter.
switching back to metacity puts them on the left again.

Mblackwell

April 21st, 2010, 06:05 PM

Yeah, makes sense. I was using a theme that always had them on the right, so there's no way I would have noticed.

Roasted

April 22nd, 2010, 08:48 PM

I like them on the left. My metacity has them on the left. When I switch over to check out gnome-shell, is there a way I can have them set on the left?

screaminj3sus

April 22nd, 2010, 08:56 PM

I tried to like Gnome Shell. I really did. I used it on Karmic for 10 days, exclusively. I dislike it immensely. I see no real purpose for it except as an option if desired. Seems that won't be the case though. If this is the direction Gnome 3 will be taking, then I'll need to get use to using the closest thing to Gnome in it's current state...XFCE. Or maybe give LXDE a spin. In any event, Gnome Shell just is not something I'd ever use.

The statement from HolidayQueen above sums it up for me, quite well.
"Anyone who doesn't use workspaces and doesn't appreciate his recent documents visible to everyone who passes by will find most of shell's features useless, and since it takes away compiz and gnome-panel applets, they'll further concluded that it's another layer to gnome that doesn't add anything for them and takes quite a few things away."

Try xubuntu 10.04, its quite nice and WAY faster than gnome on my laptop (2.0ghz core2, 4gb ram) XFCE is extremely similar to the current gnome so people who dont like gnome3 should transition very easily to it.

I tried lxde and found it kinda "meh".

I am sticking with ubuntu/gnome for now until gnome3 actually comes out, ill give it one more shot then but I most likely will end up on xfce.

WaskelyWabbit

April 23rd, 2010, 04:59 AM

I like them on the left. My metacity has them on the left. When I switch over to check out gnome-shell, is there a way I can have them set on the left?

Yes. Run the configuration editor, alt F2 "gconf-editor" (no quotes), click: desktop,gnome,shell,windows; now in the right pane, right click "button_layout" and select edit key and change the string to "close,minimize,maximize:" (no quotes). I can't remember if the changes are immediate or not, so you might have to restart shell. I've had the metacity buttons this way for 2 or 3 years, and had to lock it in when they moved to the right, so not too surprised shell's buttons moved as well.

saturnblackhole

April 23rd, 2010, 02:27 PM

wykedengel

April 23rd, 2010, 03:45 PM

Like many things Linux, users will have to rethink how they use their window manager. It's not a bad thing. I am looking forward to it. GNOME is going to be able to hang with KDE in the eye candy department. It's not even in beta yet, so let's hold off on the tongue lashings until at least the RC.

Merk42

April 23rd, 2010, 03:48 PM

i searched through a few pages and couldn't find anything:

i upgraded to lucid yesterday and i noticed that the sound applet was missing in gnome shell. has this happened to anyone else and is there a solution to getting it back?

It's because the sound applet in Lucid, like the messaging menu in Karmic, uses the indicator applet which currently is incompatible with GNOME Shell

WaskelyWabbit

April 23rd, 2010, 05:30 PM

i searched through a few pages and couldn't find anything:

i upgraded to lucid yesterday and i noticed that the sound applet was missing in gnome shell. has this happened to anyone else and is there a solution to getting it back?

Alt F2 type "gnome-volume-control-applet" (no quotes). To start automatically go to: Preferences,Startup Applications - and enter this command and give it a name.

If using the default ubuntu mono icons, your volume control will be dark as the symbolic links to this applet were removed as of ubuntu-mono 0.0.17.

It looks great with the 0.0.16 package, but this also changes the volume icon in rhythmbox and totem.

saturnblackhole

April 23rd, 2010, 05:47 PM

^^^

wow thanks a lot problem solved.

cariboo907

April 23rd, 2010, 08:00 PM

Yes. Run the configuration editor, alt F2 "gconf-editor" (no quotes), click: desktop,gnome,shell,windows; now in the right pane, right click "button_layout" and select edit key and change the string to "close,minimize,maximize:" (no quotes). I can't remember if the changes are immediate or not, so you might have to restart shell. I've had the metacity buttons this way for 2 or 3 years, and had to lock it in when they moved to the right, so not too surprised shell's buttons moved as well.

Thanks, that worked for me. No more confusion. :)

northwestuntu

April 23rd, 2010, 08:26 PM

wow the new gnome doesn't look good at all :(

maybe ill change my mind after using it, but makes me think about switching to kde or xfce.

k3lt01

April 23rd, 2010, 09:18 PM

Calash

April 23rd, 2010, 09:28 PM

I am giving it a try on both my work and home system. Both are X64.

I like the concept alot. The use of workspaces in this way is a great idea to make an often unused feature more useful. Once I got my favorites setup I was in good shape for application starting.

I do wish there was a "Filesystem" link under Places and Devices, but this can be worked around by enabling the Computer desktop Icon, as can the Trash issue.

Outside of some of the issues already quoted I have only two complains, both may be resolved as development continues.

1 - Qt apps do not minimize to the new notification tray. I shrunk Amarok and could not access it again.

2 - Performance. My home system is a single core Pentium-D 3ghz running a Nvidia 9600gt card. It can handle Compiz with no issues yet gnome-shell shudders and sputters when moving to and from the overlay. Even my more modern work system has a slight skipping as I work between the areas.

Personally I am a bit excited to see how this develops. I do hope they work out the performance before even looking at it as the default for Ubuntu.

ranch hand

April 23rd, 2010, 09:34 PM

This will not become default for some time yet. I think that the performance stuff will be worked out before that happens.

seeker5528

April 23rd, 2010, 09:52 PM

There is no need to change, if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x, its simple.

More accurately, since nobody should be sticking with Gnome 2 for that long once Gnome 3 makes it into the distrubution.

If you don't like G-S use Mutter/Metacity.

Later, Seeker

k3lt01

April 24th, 2010, 01:30 AM

More accurately, since nobody should be sticking with Gnome 2 for that long once Gnome 3 makes it into the distrubution.

If you don't like G-S use Mutter/Metacity.

Later, SeekerWhat's accurate about your statement?

Btw as far as I am aware you don't need Metacity for 2.x and Mutter is Metacity+Clutter and its for G-S.

northwestuntu

April 24th, 2010, 02:12 AM

There is no need to change, if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x, its simple.

well you know after a while it will be default in ubuntu. just a matter of time.

23meg

April 24th, 2010, 02:38 AM

What's accurate about your statement?

The fact that the sane alternative to GNOME Shell if you want to continue using GNOME isn't using GNOME 2.x, but using Metacity, or any other window manager, together with the rest of GNOME 3.x.

k3lt01

April 24th, 2010, 04:35 AM

The fact that the sane alternative to GNOME Shell if you want to continue using GNOME isn't using GNOME 2.x, but using Metacity, or any other window manager, together with the rest of GNOME 3.x.It is "insane" to think all machines can, or will be able to, even run G-S which is Gnome 3. I know my laptop wont run it atm, and if it continues this way I will be sticking to 2.x on my laptop. So I'll ask again, what is accurate about Seekers statement?

Jesus_Valdez

April 24th, 2010, 04:42 AM

Gnome shell is a part of Gnome 3, so is innacure to say "G-S is Gnome 3".

23meg

April 24th, 2010, 05:20 AM

It is "insane" to think all machines can, or will be able to, even run G-S which is Gnome 3.

GNOME Shell is not GNOME 3; it's one component of it. It's the replacement for GNOME Panel + Metacity, so using GNOME 3.x minus GNOME Shell, with any other panel + WM configuration, would be the sane route if you don't like GNOME Shell.

k3lt01

April 24th, 2010, 05:49 AM

GNOME Shell is not GNOME 3; it's one component of it. It's the replacement for GNOME Panel + Metacity, so using GNOME 3.x minus GNOME Shell, with any other panel + WM configuration, would be the sane route if you don't like GNOME Shell.And we get back to the fact that some machines will not run it. What do you do then? stick with what you already have maybe? What is that? Is it maybe Gnome 2.x? Like I said there is no need to change just keep using 2.x. Going further you do not have to use Metacity with Gnome.

Merk42

April 24th, 2010, 05:54 AM

And we get back to the fact that some machines will not run it. What do you do then? stick with what you already have maybe? What is that? Is it maybe Gnome 2.x? Like I said there is no need to change just keep using 2.x. Going further you do not have to use Metacity with Gnome.

They won't be able to run GNOME Shell but they will be able to run other components of GNOME 3 such as Zeitgeist

23meg

April 24th, 2010, 05:59 AM

And we get back to the fact that some machines will not run it. What do you do then?

Just to make sure we're on the same page: I'm talking about alternatives to GNOME Shell; things people who prefer not to use GNOME Shell might want to use. So "some machines" not running GNOME Shell is not relevant at all.

Like I said there is no need to change just keep using 2.x. Going further you do not have to use Metacity with Gnome.

You can keep using a distribution that uses 2.x that will be maintained downstream for some time, like Ubuntu 10.04, if you're fine with keeping the rest of your system "old". If you want a modern distribution, however, you'd probably have a hard time even building 2.x on it a year or two later, and at that point some components of it will likely be unmaintained / ABI-incompatible with the rest. My point is that instead, you can run a modern GNOME (3.x) running on modern foundation components, just minus GNOME Shell itself, instead of which you'd use whatever panel (if any) and WM you like.

k3lt01

April 24th, 2010, 06:05 AM

You can keep using a distribution that uses 2.x that will be maintained downstream for some time, like Ubuntu 10.04, if you're fine with keeping the rest of your system "old".That's my point. Simple isn't it?

23meg

April 24th, 2010, 06:16 AM

That's my point. Simple isn't it?

If it were "simple" for me to deduce that from your first post, I wouldn't have replied to it at all.

k3lt01

April 24th, 2010, 06:24 AM

If it were "simple" for me to deduce that from your first post, I wouldn't have replied to it at all.I acknowledge my initial reply on this matter could have said more (I could have made it multiple pages but to what end?).

However, no one had to deduce anything because it still stands the person I replied to doesn't have to go to something other than Gnome just because they don't like G-S at this time. We have Lucid for 3 years it will be released with 2.x and it is highly unlikely it will ever get 3.x by default. Seeker's statement is not more accurate and as it stands no one has given a reply that makes it more accurate. And yes I agree I made a mistake about G3 and G-S, you learn something new everyday.

Anyway, that's enough from me, I have made my point.

seeker5528

April 24th, 2010, 08:29 PM

What's accurate about your statement?

Btw as far as I am aware you don't need Metacity for 2.x and Mutter is Metacity+Clutter and its for G-S.

More accurate because G-S is just one small part of Gnome 3, and while Gnome 3 will continue to allow you to use a different window managers, panels, etc... just as Gnome 2 does, sticking with Gnome 2 after Gnome 3 makes it into the distribution is not likely to be an option.

Mutter does get described as Metacity+Clutter, and that's true enough for the majority, but not all stuff gets ported between them. and some people who don't have a combination of hardware and driver that provides halfway decent OpenGL support will still need Metacity, either because the video card doesn't support the necessary range of features or because the driver needs work.

EDIT: Yeah, I know. I should have read the rest of the thread before responding, it's all pretty much redundant at this point, but hey...... ;)

Later, Seeker

k3lt01

April 24th, 2010, 09:35 PM

I hope I don't have to keep explaining a simple concept repeatedly, it is getting tedious especially when people are not reading things properly or are trying to see more than is actually there.

sticking with Gnome 2 after Gnome 3 makes it into the distribution is not likely to be an option.Are you then saying people should ditch an LTS which has something they are quite happy and comfortable with when Meerkat comes out just because Meerkat has G3?

Lucid which comes out in less than a week will come out with 2.x and will probably never had G3 as an option let alone as standard in its 3 year desktop lifespan. People do not have to change in the foreseeable future, the next 3 years at least. That is the point of my statement. You saying that people wont have an option to stick with what is released in an LTS is totally inaccurate.

Calash

April 24th, 2010, 10:44 PM

I hope I don't have to keep explaining a simple concept repeatedly, it is getting tedious especially when people are not reading things properly or are trying to see more than is actually there.

Are you then saying people should ditch an LTS which has something they are quite happy and comfortable with when Meerkat comes out just because Meerkat has G3?

Lucid which comes out in less than a week will come out with 2.x and will probably never had G3 as an option let alone as standard in its 3 year desktop lifespan. People do not have to change in the foreseeable future, the next 3 years at least. That is the point of my statement. You saying that people wont have an option to stick with what is released in an LTS is totally inaccurate.

I found a timeline that has Gnome-Shell being completed by September 2010, but nothing about G3 being completed at that time. Is there something I am missing?

zombiepig

April 25th, 2010, 12:41 AM

Gnome Shell hasn't even been officially accepted as a gnome module yet (http://live.gnome.org/TwoPointThirtyone/Desktop). (Personally, I'm hoping that either it gets voted down, or that when canonical start including it in ubuntu they do a major hatchet job on it. :P)

But until it's officially accepted into Gnome, it's not yet a part of Gnome 3.0.

petejk

April 25th, 2010, 10:07 AM

Gnome3-session package's version has changed from 2.28 to 2.30 in Debian Sid.

Which means I've had a play with Gnome Shell in my Lucid install (from Ricotz's PPA) starting straight from GDM.

You need the gnome3-session deb - http://packages.debian.org/sid/gnome3-session (i386 or amd64 depending on your setup). Install the two packages below first.

Dependencies:

gnome-session-bin - http://packages.debian.org/sid/gnome/gnome-session-bin

and gnome-session-common - http://packages.debian.org/sid/gnome/gnome-session-common

One of the dependencies will produce errors when installing - use the dpkg command with -i --force-overwrite.

Reboot, and start gnome-shell without using gnome-shell --replace !

But - if someone knows how to get the close/minimize/maximize buttons over to the left to match the Lucid default settings, that would be awesome!

seeker5528

April 26th, 2010, 08:44 PM

Are you then saying people should ditch an LTS which has something they are quite happy and comfortable with when Meerkat comes out just because Meerkat has G3?

I never said that.

If you stick with Lucid, the whole question of Gnome 3 becomes irrelevant.

But you have talked about sticking with Gnome 2.x in order to avoid G-S as if G-S=Gnome 3. Which is painting a picture of things different than what they are.

Since G-S is not a requirement of Gnome 3, you will still be able to use Mutter+Panels or if necessary due to hardware/driver limitations Metacity+Panels.

There are always reasons for people to stick with an LTS release, and to a lesser extent reasons to stick to some non-LTS along the way due to some quirk, change in hardware support, etc...

Once Gnome 3 makes it into a release, if your only reason to stick with an older release over the release with Gnome 3 is to avoid G-S, there is little reason to do that.

When Gnome 2 was released, the official window manager changed from Sawfish to Metacity, and there were plenty of people who didn't like it, but that didn't keep them from upgrading to Gnome 2 and continuing to use Sawfish for their window manager.

G-S is a little more overt than that because it also takes over the functions of the panel, but that doesn't change the fact that you won't be forced to use it.

Later, Seeker

k3lt01

April 26th, 2010, 09:13 PM

I never said that. I asked if that was what you were saying (i.e. infering, hinting at, making the point about) not if it is what you said.

If you stick with Lucid, the whole question of Gnome 3 becomes irrelevant. Which is my point, the person I replied to DOES NOT need to change to something else does he? Now we have that settled it just remains for you to confirm you post wasn't actually more accurate.

But you have talked about sticking with Gnome 2.x in order to avoid G-S as if G-S=Gnome 3. Which is painting a picture of things different than what they are. Initially I talked about just staying with Gnome2 if the person I replied to didn't want to change. Lucid after all will have 2.x for 3 years. You however said that once G3 comes out people will have to change because they will hav no option, that is simply incorrect.

I have admitted I made an error about G3 and G-S. I wonder if you will admit your error in telling people they will have no option but to change when G3 comes out when infact they will have Lucid for another 2 and a half years.

Like I have already said, there was no need for anyone to go further than what my post said. There was no need for more accuracy, there was no need to read anything into what was there. It was a simple statement telling the person I replied to that he/she didn't need to change if he didn't want to. He could stick with 2.x for the foreseeable future.

SgtPepperKSU

April 26th, 2010, 09:32 PM

It seems the only disconnect here is that for k3lt01, 2.5 years >= foreseeable future (the inevitable switch from Gnome 2 is so far away, there's no need to mention it). For the other people posting, 2.5 years < foreseeable future (eventually, a Gnome 2 solution won't be supported, and a move to Gnome >2 will be needed, with or without Gnome Shell).

If you adjust for that inconsistency, everyone is saying the same thing and just talking past each other. It seems everyone is one the same page.

moore.bryan

April 26th, 2010, 10:13 PM

Is anyone else getting strange maximize behaviors after the last gnome-shell update (rictoz repo) a couple of days ago?

k3lt01

April 26th, 2010, 10:23 PM

Nope we aren't all on the same page.

When it is inferred that you are insane, and it was infered, if you don't swap to Meerkat when it comes out with G3 there is an issue. When it is inferred that you have to swap to something because something will no longer be available shortly after (i.e. 6 months as against foreseeable future) there is also an issue. Claim to be more accurate all you want but please tell everyone else what your source is that makes you more accurate. In other words, Seeker should give us the information that says Lucid will not have 2.x in 6-12 months. If he cannot he is not more accurate, he has an opinion and it is a worthy opinion but it cannot be claimed to be more accurate with regards to my initial post on this matter.

I admitted my error, and am not afraid to acknowledge that. It would be nice however if those who claim to have more accurate information, not just what has happened in the past because that in itself can be used both ways, if they would share it or say it is just their opinion.

23meg

April 26th, 2010, 10:41 PM

When it is inferred that you are insane, and it was infered,

That's inferring a bit too much, don't you think? I didn't call you "insane"; you indeed inferred that from my saying "the sane option is..", in reply to a terse post of yours where you didn't cite anything about staying with Lucid (which, in turn, led me to infer that we were talking about following up with future GNOME releases).

You're reading a lot into what's a simple misunderstanding.

if you don't swap to Meerkat when it comes out with G3 there is an issue.

Nobody even implied that it would have GNOME 3 in its entirety. That's not going to be decided until UDS.

Merk42

April 26th, 2010, 11:12 PM

Nobody even implied that it would have GNOME 3 in its entirety. That's not going to be decided until UDS.

I want to make sure GNOME Shell is a topic for UDS, did I do it right? (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/gnome-shell/+spec/desktop-gnome-shell)

23meg

April 26th, 2010, 11:22 PM

I want to make sure GNOME Shell is a topic for UDS, did I do it right? (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/gnome-shell/+spec/desktop-gnome-shell)

Apparently you assigned a team without consulting them (not a good thing to do), and the assignment was removed (maybe you removed it?).

But don't worry, there will certainly be such a discussion (there's no real need for this blueprint). If you'll be attending UDS and are sure you want to drive it, set yourself as the drafter, mark yourself as "participation essential" for the spec, announce the spec on the IRC channels and/or mailing lists of the relevant teams (UX&D, Desktop, DX), talk to the UDS track leads for the Design and Desktop tracks (Ivanka Majic and Rick Spencer) and set them as "Approver" if they agree.

k3lt01

April 26th, 2010, 11:48 PM

That's inferring a bit too much, don't you think? Not at all, I took what you said at face value. You said the sane option is ..... So by inference staying with Lucid after Meerkat is released is "insane".

I didn't call you "insane"; you indeed inferred that from my saying "the sane option is..", in reply to a terse post of yours where you didn't cite anything about staying with Lucid (which, in turn, led me to infer that we were talking about following up with future GNOME releases).Did I say you inferred I (ME) was insane? Choose your words wisely ok.

You're reading a lot into what's a simple misunderstanding. I'm not the one saying "more accurately" when someone else said the person does not need to change. Who's reading to much into something here? I asked Seeker how his statement was more accurate, there was no need for anyone to bring the "sane" option in to the discussion at all.

Nobody even implied that it would have GNOME 3 in its entirety. That's not going to be decided until UDS.I didn't say anyone did so please don't go inferring that I did by saying this.

If this was just a "simple" misunderstanding then maybe all these posts should simply be removed from this discussion as the last post that has any relevance is mine where I simply tried to say the person does not need to change.

Merk42

April 26th, 2010, 11:49 PM

Apparently you assigned a team without consulting them (not a good thing to do), and the assignment was removed (maybe you removed it?).

But don't worry, there will certainly be such a discussion (there's no real need for this blueprint). If you'll be attending UDS and are sure you want to drive it, set yourself as the drafter, mark yourself as "participation essential" for the spec, announce the spec on the IRC channels and/or mailing lists of the relevant teams (UX&D, Desktop, DX), talk to the UDS track leads for the Design and Desktop tracks (Ivanka Majic and Rick Spencer) and set them as "Approver" if they agree.
Thing is, there is no way I can make it to UDS to do it myself.
I didn't know what to do, I originally had no one assigned, but then it didn't show up in the list of blueprints (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/sprints/uds-m) so I didn't think I did it right.
How are you so certain there will be a discussion about it? I'd hate to assume there was and then it doesn't happen and it's too late to suggest it.

k3lt01

April 27th, 2010, 12:20 AM

wow the new gnome doesn't look good at all :(

maybe ill change my mind after using it, but makes me think about switching to kde or xfce.There is no need to change, if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x, its simple.How can this simple statement be taken so wrong?

We are after all in Lucid testing, Lucid does have 2.x. If northwestuntu doesn't like G-S he does not have to change away from 2.x. I really don't understand how hard that is to understand. Reading through the trail of posts after this simple statement is quite bemusing.

23meg

April 27th, 2010, 12:21 AM

Not at all, I took what you said at face value. You said the sane option is ..... So by inference staying with Lucid after Meerkat is released is "insane".

And, let me repeat, hence the misunderstanding: at that point, you hadn't talked about Lucid at all, and I was assuming that we were talking about future GNOME in general. And you confirmed later that your post could have been misunderstood due to lack of detail.

Did I say you inferred I (ME) was insane? Choose your words wisely ok.

You said "when it is inferred", and I took that to mean "I inferred from that sentence that I'm indirectly called insane". If you meant something else, please clarify.

I'm not the one saying "more accurately" when someone else said the person does not need to change. Who's reading to much into something here? I asked Seeker how his statement was more accurate, there was no need for anyone to bring the "sane" option in to the discussion at all.

I referred to using GNOME 3.x minus GNOME Shell as "the sane option" as opposed to staying with an unmaintained GNOME 2.x, since, again, at that point in the discussion, it wasn't clear from your posts what exactly you meant, and it could very well be interpreted as staying with an unmaintained GNOME 2.x. Note that lots of people incorrectly frame discussions of using GNOME Shell vs. not using it as a matter of staying with an antiquated GNOME version, or switching to some other DE. This is a common misconception, hence my sensitivity to it.

If you were offended specifically by the usage of the word "sane", note that English isn't my native language, and so far the undertone the opposite of that word could carry in a context like this hadn't occurred to me. In technical discussions I use it in a strictly technical sense, as in "technically sane", and I've observed countless times that it's used that way in similar discussions, without anyone getting offended.

If this was just a "simple" misunderstanding then maybe all these posts should simply be removed from this discussion as the last post that has any relevance is mine where I simply tried to say the person does not need to change.

No, there are other relevant posts in between that add new information, and there's nothing that necessitates post removal in the discussion.

23meg

April 27th, 2010, 12:31 AM

Thing is, there is no way I can make it to UDS to do it myself.
I didn't know what to do, I originally had no one assigned, but then it didn't show up in the list of blueprints (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/sprints/uds-m) so I didn't think I did it right.

For it to show up in that list, it has to be approved by the summit organizers for discussion in the summit, and that hasn't happened yet.

How are you so certain there will be a discussion about it? I'd hate to assume there was and then it doesn't happen and it's too late to suggest it.

New GNOME modules and what to do about them are always discussed in UDS, and GNOME Shell is an obvious candidate for 2.32, as well as being planned for a long time beforehand and having been discussed at the last two summits. And since it's a very user-facing potential change in the defaults, given that there's a dedicated design track at this UDS and the entire UX&D team attends UDS, there's no way they're not going to want to discuss it.

Not to mention that there are many topics regarding Ubuntu integration that are still undecided, such as what to do about notifications, indicators, etc.

k3lt01

April 27th, 2010, 12:47 AM

23meg, You know I like your work so this is nothing personal ok.

I shouldn't need to clarify anything, especially considering we are in Lucid testing. Lucid has 3 years of support so 2.x in theory will be maintained by Canonical (if Gnome doesn't) for 3 years unless they do change to G3 in Lucid itself but that is probably unlikely.

I refer back to my last post and wonder in absolute amazement how such a simple statement could end up with the discussion after it.

btw, I kinda gathered English wasn't your native language but I must say you use it brilliantly. Even native speakers make mistakes with it and I am in that boat myself. With regards to "sane" having studied psychology kind of means I take it in a psychological sense and I was unaware that it could be used in a, as you say, technical sense.

saturnblackhole

April 27th, 2010, 01:01 AM

Is anyone else getting strange maximize behaviors after the last gnome-shell update (rictoz repo) a couple of days ago?

are you talking about when you maximize a window it becomes transparent and unusable? is so yes i'm also experiencing this problem. hopefully it'll be resolved with the latest update from rictoz.

seeker5528

April 27th, 2010, 02:06 AM

Which is my point, the person I replied to DOES NOT need to change to something else does he? Now we have that settled it just remains for you to confirm you post wasn't actually more accurate.

That may have been the point but....

There is no need to change, if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x, its simple.

Was too open to interpretation to accurately reflect that.

Yes the 'There is no need to change' part is accurate but a little vague whether that applied to Lucid and not Gnome 2 since Gnome 2 was mentioned after that but Lucid was not.

The 'if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x' part leads people in the direction of thinking that if you don't like G-S you have to stick with Gnome 2.x which is incorrect.

In particular when you have people elsewhere ranting about changes in Gnome 3 when in reality all their complaints are specific to G-S.

So I would still have to view 'If you don't like G-S use Mutter/Metacity.' as being a more accurate statement, at the very least it applies equally whether you stick with Lucid over the long haul or upgrade to a later version of Ubuntu that includes Gnome 3.

It is equally accurate that sticking with Lucid will be easy and later after upgrading to a future version of Ubuntu that includes Gnome 3 choosing to use Metacity or Mutter will be easy.

And just because G-S will be default in Gnome 3 doesn't mean Ubuntu will ship with it as the default when they get Gnome 3 included in a release, for all we know they may keep Metacity as the default for a while.

I expect G-S will win out eventually, but it make take a few revisions the get there.

Later, Seeker

k3lt01

April 27th, 2010, 02:36 AM

That may have been the point but....

Was too open to interpretation to accurately reflect that. Seeker, we are in Lucid testing what else was I going to refer to? My statement was accurate with regards to the person I replied to, just because you want to read more into it than was in the initial discussion does not make your statement any more accurate than mine.

Yes the 'There is no need to change' part is accurate but a little vague whether that applied to Lucid and not Gnome 2 since Gnome 2 was mentioned after that but Lucid was not. I shall repeat it for you, we are in Lucid testing, lucid has 2.x, it is going to be supported for 3 years. Your suggestion that 2.x will not be offered after G3 is released is inaccurate and I will ask you again to show evidence to support your statement. Let's be very clear here we are discussing Ubuntu and Lucid, nothing else.

The 'if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x' part leads people in the direction of thinking that if you don't like G-S you have to stick with Gnome 2.x which is incorrect. This is where I repeat you are reading to much into a simple statement. If I wanted to say he had to stick with 2.x I would have phrased it like this "if you don't like G-S you will HAVE TO stick with 2.x". But everyone can see I didn't say that at all. Instead I said "There is no need to change, if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x, its simple." so unfortunately you are reading something into a simple statement that isn't there. This then makes your interpretation inaccurate and in essence your entire discussion after it.

In particular when you have people elsewhere ranting about changes in Gnome 3 when in reality all their complaints are specific to G-S. That's other people, you replied to a statement I made. Others then come in on that. Please support your assertions with evidence.

So I would still have to view 'If you don't like G-S use Mutter/Metacity.' as being a more accurate statement, at the very least it applies equally whether you stick with Lucid over the long haul or upgrade to a later version of Ubuntu that includes Gnome 3.I have said it more than once you do not need metacity to use 2.x.

It is equally accurate that sticking with Lucid will be easy and later after upgrading to a future version of Ubuntu that includes Gnome 3 choosing to use Metacity or Mutter will be easy. By the time Lucid is no longer support our friend may like G-S, in which case your discussion is invalid with regards to his original statement and my reply to him.

And just because G-S will be default in Gnome 3 doesn't mean Ubuntu will ship with it as the default when they get Gnome 3 included in a release, for all we know they may keep Metacity as the default for a while. I don't ever remember suggesting G-S will be default, infact I have said a few times in this thread and others that Gnome-Panels will continue to be supported into the future.

I just want to ask you if you would stop reading into a simple statement things that simply are not there.

ToxicBurn

April 27th, 2010, 03:27 AM

If gnome changes to look like the screens from the first post i will be going to KDE or back to windows ..

the screens in the first post look like pure crap

Merk42

April 27th, 2010, 04:02 AM

If gnome changes to look like the screens from the first post i will be going to KDE or back to windows ..

the screens in the first post look like pure crap

It eventually will, (more or less given it's still in development). That's kind the point of this thread, to let users know what's coming (at some point I don't want to start a fight over semantics of time)

ToxicBurn

April 27th, 2010, 04:27 AM

Well i sure hope this new Shell is good if not i see Kubuntu taking over

NightwishFan

April 27th, 2010, 05:28 AM

Yes, the maximize thing is a bug in mutter. We just have to wait for ricotz to build.
http://git.gnome.org/browse/mutter/commit/?id=d8b0f213b299d0d1e6084caf5b8bef469005d465

northwestuntu

April 27th, 2010, 05:36 AM

can't we all just get along :)

Calash

April 27th, 2010, 02:27 PM

Where is the best place to go for troubleshooting of this.

My home system is fine, but when I updated my work system to 10.04 things went a bit screwy. It was not the cleanest upgrade, did part of it via apt-get before it bombed out. Then I ran the partial upgrade from Upgrade-manager but had to step away from the computer. When I cam back the screen saver would not allow me in. Forced a reboot and got into terminal and was able to finish the upgrade from there. Couchdb and Gnome shell both had issues at this point.

Doing a purge and reinstall fixed both, except now Gnome Shell causes visual distortion on my windows, similar to the picture of Gnome Shell in a virtual environment, but the distortion is limited to individual windows. My Virtualbox sessions are also transparent, allowing me to see to the Gnome desktop.

I removed everything and reverted to the official repo version, with the exact same result.

Desktop effects work fine, so I am hesitant to think it is a video driver issue or a problem with compositing. Not sure where to look, or even how to search for this problem.

HolidayQueen

April 27th, 2010, 04:42 PM

That's kind the point of this thread, to let users know what's coming

gnome-death

Though im not terribly worried, i've seen enough negative response on forums and blogs to know that when major distributions introduce this in their alpha's and betas, the public response will be enough to convince Canonical and others not to inflict gnome shell on us.

the problem with the developers is they seem to have a steve jobs complex, wherein their idea of evolution should be forcibly applied to everyone. what's going to happen though is their attempt to compete with KDE, will likely send more users to KDE lol.

cariboo907

April 27th, 2010, 05:10 PM

Merk42

April 27th, 2010, 05:14 PM

The big problem with the negative responders, is that they are also the same people that respond negatively to almost any change. So far you still have a choice in gnome 3, you don't have to use gnome-shell if you don't want to.

That's not really a fair assumption. I personally hate the lack of an easy window switcher, but that's not to say I hate change of any kind.

NightwishFan

April 27th, 2010, 05:39 PM

k3lt01

April 27th, 2010, 08:53 PM

The big problem with the negative responders, is that they are also the same people that respond negatively to almost any change.I agree, and they often say if it ain't broke why fix it which isn't really an excuse not to try new things.

Chauncellor

April 27th, 2010, 10:20 PM

That's not really a fair assumption. I personally hate the lack of an easy window switcher, but that's not to say I hate change of any kind.

I second that. I think my biggest beef with GS is just the lack of an easy switcher. Everything else isn't too bad.

FatalChaos

April 27th, 2010, 11:53 PM

I've gotta say I always love trying new things, but I really don't like the lack of an easy window switcher. I think what it comes down to is that Gnome-Shell's window switching just fundamentally takes longer in a lot of situations. Alt + tab can require several clicks and takes some getting used to for those of us who don't use it regularly, and using the activities screen requires a click (I use the hotkey to bring it up) + mouse movement + another click.

Gnome-shell does look kinda nifty though, and I assume in the final version it'll be as easy to switch themes as it is in Gnome right now. I think something like an option to install a dock on first boot would go a long way to appeasing people.

lockalidiot

April 28th, 2010, 03:35 AM

What I actually noticed is that it is a great alternative for UNR interface. I use Gnome-Shell on my netbook and "vanilla" gnome on my desktop cpu.

cariboo907

April 28th, 2010, 04:13 AM

I was skeptical for a while but not any more. When using anything else like KDE or Gnome2 I keep absentmindedly trying to open the activities thing and am disappointed when I can't. :D

I think it might just work out.

I was using XP this afternoon, I kept trying to open activities too. I guess I don't use Windows often enough, but I keep getting annoyed that most of what I do on a day-to-day basis can't be done out of the box eg: highlighting text and using the middle button to paste.

EMCGFX

April 28th, 2010, 04:35 AM

Can't wait for GNOME Shell, it looks very interesting :D

Merk42

April 28th, 2010, 05:04 AM

Can't wait for GNOME Shell, it looks very interesting :D

Then follow the instructions in the first post and run it now in its unfinished state

WinterWeaver

April 28th, 2010, 07:29 AM

as everyone may know, there is a thread on creating themes for gnome-shell at: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=9180923#post9180923

I have created a small script to assist with themes. I posted about it at: http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=9180923&postcount=89

Note that it's BETA software, and you will use it at own risk, but it would be great if someone can give some feedback.

ty,

Peter09

April 28th, 2010, 08:16 AM

Does anyone keep getting a problem with gnome-shell concerning menus. Clicking on an application menu in a workspace displays the menu list, but as soon as you move the cursor the list disappears. This makes the shell unusable.

NightwishFan

April 28th, 2010, 08:25 AM

Like right click? Or file edit etc? Nothing like that here.

Peter09

April 28th, 2010, 08:37 AM

Like right click? Or file edit etc? Nothing like that here.

Just a simple right click on a top menu in an application. (say Thunderbird)

NightwishFan

April 28th, 2010, 08:46 AM

Interesting. Try using just mutter and see if it still does that. Exit the shell then press alt+f2 and type:

mutter --replace

It is the base window manager without the shell. If it still does it then it is a mutter bug.

Peter09

April 28th, 2010, 08:52 AM

Interesting. Try using just mutter and see if it still does that. Exit the shell then press alt+f2 and type:
Code:
mutter --replace
It is the base window manager without the shell. If it still does it then it is a mutter bug.

OK - not at home at the moment - but I'll try that as soon as I can.

HolidayQueen

April 28th, 2010, 03:41 PM

The big problem with the negative responders, is that they are also the same people that respond negatively to almost any change. So far you still have a choice in gnome 3, you don't have to use gnome-shell if you don't want to.

That's a pretty big assumption. Ive busted my installation more times than i care to count, trying new things. But i decided a long time ago i didn't need half a dozen workspaces to get on with my work, so having a DE that places more emphasis on that is counter-productive.

Calash

April 28th, 2010, 04:31 PM

A follow-up to my problems:

It does not appear to be profile based. Originally I found that the issue did not happen on the guest session. However after testing some more I found it did happen, just at much less of a frequency. Conky and Firefox seem to scramble the most followed by non-active terminals.

The scrambling will also occure when I go from the overlay back to a window. Repeating the process seems to increase the likelihood of this happening.

I still have no real direction as to where to look for the problem. Searches for distortion in Gnome-Shell come up empty. I did find some similar issues with Compiz, but they all related to Nvidia cards. I am running an ATI.

Everything worked fine before my upgrade (as noted, a rocky upgrade)

floydsp

April 28th, 2010, 05:54 PM

The following packages have unmet dependencies:
gnome-shell: Depends: libgjs0 but it is not going to be installed
E: Broken packages

This is what I get when trying to install can someone help me through this?
ubuntu 10.04 64 bit

floydsp

[h2o]

April 28th, 2010, 06:55 PM

That's a pretty big assumption. Ive busted my installation more times than i care to count, trying new things. But i decided a long time ago i didn't need half a dozen workspaces to get on with my work, so having a DE that places more emphasis on that is counter-productive.
And for some people it is more productive

Merk42

April 28th, 2010, 07:21 PM

floydsp

April 28th, 2010, 07:49 PM

I was trying to install from synaptic when I get that error.

I can install from source but its temporary as it seems to be only in the
terminal.

I can issue the command gnome-shell --replace and I get gnome-shell not in stalled

floydsp

NightwishFan

April 28th, 2010, 07:52 PM

Try this from a terminal:

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get -f install

If it asks to remove anything, ask here first, dont continue.

floydsp

April 28th, 2010, 07:56 PM

Thanks for fast reply am trying this now
Fetched 11.0MB in 36s (302kB/s)
Reading package lists... Done
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.

floydsp

NightwishFan

April 28th, 2010, 08:14 PM

Ok, try installing gnome-shell again. Are you using the ricotz ppa?

floydsp

April 28th, 2010, 08:49 PM

I have them in repositories but don't know if I am using them or not.
JS LOG: GNOME Shell started at Wed Apr 28 2010 14:41:37 GMT-0500 (CST)
JS LOG: Failed to acquire org.freedesktop.Notifications; trying again

(mutter:7050): Clutter-WARNING **: The actor 'StBin' is currently inside an allocation cycle; calling clutter_actor_queue_relayout() is not recommended

(mutter:7050): Clutter-WARNING **: The actor 'StBoxLayout' is currently inside an allocation cycle; calling clutter_actor_queue_relayout() is not recommended

(mutter:7050): Clutter-WARNING **: The actor 'StBin' is currently inside an allocation cycle; calling clutter_actor_queue_relayout() is not recommended
this is what I am getting as errors.

petejk

April 28th, 2010, 09:46 PM

floydsp: If you have an issue with libgjs0 it could be because you also have the mozilla daily ppa source.

This ppa installs a newer version of xulrunner 1.9.2 than libgjs0 is designed to work with.

The solution is to in Synaptic, search for and select the xulrunner-1.9.2 package, go to the Package menu, and then the Force Version option, and then change from version 1.9.2.5 to 1.9.2.3 (the version in the Lucid repos).

Problem is, at the moment, there is a Synaptic bug ( https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/synaptic/+bug/568925 ) causing a problem with the Force Version option.
So you need to upgrade Synaptic https://launchpad.net/~dnjl/+archive/experimental/+sourcepub/1086926/+listing-archive-extra (select amd64/i386 according to your PC) first.

Then remove xulrunner-1.9.2-gnome-support. Apply
Then lock xulrunner-1.9.2 to 1.9.2.3. Apply
Then select xulrunner-1.9.2 and Force Version to 1.9.2.3. Apply

Now you can install libgjs0

Pete

NCLI

April 28th, 2010, 10:15 PM

Goodbye, oh Glorious Gnome-Shell thread! I shall miss you when we move into our new habitat: Maverick Meerkat Testing and Discussion.

:-({|=

floydsp

April 28th, 2010, 11:33 PM

floydsp@floydsp-desktop:~$ gnome-shell --replace
Failed to start shell
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/bin/gnome-shell", line 423, in <module>
shell = start_shell()
File "/usr/bin/gnome-shell", line 184, in start_shell
(server_glx_extensions, client_glx_extensions, glx_extensions) = _get_glx_extensions()
File "/usr/bin/gnome-shell", line 121, in _get_glx_extensions
server_glx_extensions = set(re.split("\s*,\s*", glxinfo_map['server glx extensions'].strip()))
KeyError: 'server glx extensions'
floydsp@floydsp-desktop:~$ Cannot register the panel shell: there is already one running.
/usr/bin/compiz (core) - Fatal: glXCreateContext failed
/usr/bin/compiz (core) - Error: Failed to manage screen: 0
/usr/bin/compiz (core) - Fatal: No manageable screens found on display :0.0

Launching fallback window manager

It seemed to install from synaptic but won't start now

floydsp

cariboo907

April 28th, 2010, 11:43 PM

Goodbye, oh Glorious Gnome-Shell thread! I shall miss you when we move into our new habitat: Maverick Meerkat Testing and Discussion.

:-({|=

Actually I was just thinking whether this thread should be moved to Maverick Testing & Discussion when it opens.

saturnblackhole

April 28th, 2010, 11:45 PM

is there a way to clear the "recent items" list in the side panel? there's some *cough* *cough* items i rather not have shown.

Merk42

April 29th, 2010, 12:23 AM

Actually I was just thinking whether this thread should be moved to Maverick Testing & Discussion when it opens.

Why? a lot of the discussion goes in circles and no one new is going to read through 170+ pages. I'll just make a new one in Maverick Testing Forums if need be.

23meg

April 29th, 2010, 12:36 AM

Why? a lot of the discussion goes in circles and no one new is going to read through 170+ pages. I'll just make a new one in Maverick Testing Forums if need be.

I agree. When you start a thread titled "$CONTROVERSIAL_CHANGE", it becomes a lightning rod for people who are worked up over that change, regardless of your intentions, and nobody really reads such threads to any benefit for testing.

If people need help testing GNOME Shell, they can start new threads per issue. That way, unrelated issues won't mix up, there will be less noise, those so inclined will actually be able to read and help, and people who just need to do drive-by bashing or praising or chit-chat can do so in Community Cafe.

seeker5528

April 29th, 2010, 02:03 AM

Seeker, we are in Lucid testing what else was I going to refer to? My statement was accurate with regards to the person I replied to, just because you want to read more into it than was in the initial discussion does not make your statement any more accurate than mine.

Since G-S is not official yet, the post you responded to is forward looking based on something that's not finished yet and already and making it sound like they equate G-S and Gnome 3 to be the same thing.

wow the new gnome doesn't look good at all :(

maybe ill change my mind after using it, but makes me think about switching to kde or xfce.

And equating them to be the same thing seems to be carried forward even more overtly by the "if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x" part of your response.

I shall repeat it for you, we are in Lucid testing, lucid has 2.x, it is going to be supported for 3 years. Your suggestion that 2.x will not be offered after G3 is released is inaccurate and I will ask you again to show evidence to support your statement.

History supports my statement, when going from Gnome 1 to Gnome 2, KDE 3 to KDE 4, etc.... some libraries are kept for backward compatibility of applications, the gnome 1 libraries only recently being dropped, but it is pretty rare that you have a choice between the old DE and the new DE in the same version of a distribution.

Being a thread dedicated to something that is not official until Gnome 3 gets released, I responded in a forward looking manner. The fact that Lucid will still be available after there is an Ubuntu release that includes Gnome 3 doesn't make the lack of availability untrue, it just makes it irrelevant for those who choose to stick with Lucid.

If I had interpreted 'There is no need to change' to mean stick with Lucid, I would have limited myself to responding to the 'if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x' part of what you said.

This is where I repeat you are reading to much into a simple statement. If I wanted to say he had to stick with 2.x I would have phrased it like this "if you don't like G-S you will HAVE TO stick with 2.x". But everyone can see I didn't say that at all. Instead I said "There is no need to change, if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x, its simple." so unfortunately you are reading something into a simple statement that isn't there. This then makes your interpretation inaccurate and in essence your entire discussion after it.

As you said everyone can see what you said, without regard to how "There is no need to change" gets interpreted, 'if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x' without any interpreting gives the appearance of equating G-S as being Gnome 3 which would then naturally be interpreted to mean 'if you don't like Gnome 3 stick with Gnome 2.x'.

Which was the point of my response, G-S does not equal Gnome 3, it's just one optional component of it.

[qoute]That's other people, you replied to a statement I made. Others then come in on that. Please support your assertions with evidence.[/quote]

I assume here that you are talking of my reference to people complaining about Gnome 3, when they are really talking about G-S.

People equating G-S and Gnome 3 as being the same thing was such a common occurrence, there were people creating pages debunking it....

http://shanefagan.com/2010/01/15/debunking-the-gnome-3-myths/

http://live.gnome.org/GNOME3Myths

I just want to ask you if you would stop reading into a simple statement things that simply are not there.

I have a hard time reading 'if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x' other than the way it reads. It is what it is, the continued availability of Lucid or lack of availability of Gnome 2 in future releases is irrelevant to that.

I would have been perfectly happy to stop talking about it after my .....

EDIT: Yeah, I know. I should have read the rest of the thread before responding, it's all pretty much redundant at this point, but hey...... ;)

... post. Since I wouldn't have made that post at all if I had read the rest of the thread first.

Later, Seeker

cgroza

April 29th, 2010, 02:13 AM

Hold on a second... if Gnome Shell needs 3d to run ,then how its going to run on a fresh out of the box install with a nvidia card? To run it you should install the proprietary driver from command line because gnome shell wont start...Am I right or not?

The only solution I see to nvidia cards is to develop an open source driver that supports 3d with no problem or to package ubuntu with the proprietary driver(but this is against ubuntu philosophy).

cgroza

April 29th, 2010, 02:14 AM

is there a way to clear the "recent items" list in the side panel? there's some *cough* *cough* items i rather not have shown.

hmmm porn films?:lolflag::lolflag:

cariboo907

April 29th, 2010, 02:16 AM

k3lt01

April 29th, 2010, 04:32 AM

You have confused the issue to such an extent that I am starting to believe you are trolling just to save face.

That's other people, you replied to a statement I made. Others then come in on that. Please support your assertions with evidence.

I assume here that you are talking of my reference to people complaining about Gnome 3, when they are really talking about G-S.I am referring to this

More accurately, since nobody should be sticking with Gnome 2 for that long once Gnome 3 makes it into the distrubution.

If you don't like G-S use Mutter/Metacity.

Later, SeekerLucid is SUPPORTED for 3 years, people do stick with an LTS so your either saying "just ditch Lucid" or your saying "Lucid will have G3 when Meerkat is released". I have asked you a few times now support your assertions with evidence. If you can't, admit that your response is not more accurate and is just an opinion.

I have a hard time reading 'if you don't like G-S stick with Gnome 2.x' other than the way it reads. It is what it is, the continued availability of Lucid or lack of availability of Gnome 2 in future releases is irrelevant to that. No it isn't irrelevant. It is fact. Seriously, what part of, we are in Lucid, Lucid will be released with 2.x., if the person I responded to doesn't like G-S he can stick with 2.x, don't you understand? It is a simple statement which you have turned into a novel with your back and forth.

I said before to 23meg (and I don't want 23meg to come back into this because there is no need for that to happen) that I acknowledge my initial response could have had more in it. It could have been pages long, yes I am serious. However what would that have achieved apart from taking up someone else's valuable bandwidth? My statement, in its entirety and correct context stands. The person I replied to DOES NOT NEED TO CHANGE if he does not like G-S. He can stick with 2.x because it will be with us for at last another 3 years. Now if you have any insider information to refute that, i.e. 2.x will be ditched in Lucid within Lucid's lifetime, show us and I will admit I am wrong. If you can't then do the decent thing and admit you jumped to huge conclusions and shouldn't have made such big claims. If you can give solid evidence (i.e. not some blog from a nobody but something concrete from Canonical or a dev with Canonical) then I am more than happy to do likewise.

I would have been perfectly happy to stop talking about it after my .....

... post. Since I wouldn't have made that post at all if I had read the rest of the thread first. I seriously doubt this is true, you seem to want to keep defending an indefensible position. For what reason and to what end I do not know, I am beyond caring now. I'm at the stage where if I read another comment from you justifying your over analytical approach to a simple statement and turning 2 sentences into a play that would rival Les Miserables I'll make you the first person on my block list. I think that would be a pity as I have never blocked anyone on any forum I have been active in.

Merk42

April 29th, 2010, 04:37 AM

I agree. When you start a thread titled "$CONTROVERSIAL_CHANGE", it becomes a lightning rod for people who are worked up over that change, regardless of your intentions, and nobody really reads such threads to any benefit for testing.

If people need help testing GNOME Shell, they can start new threads per issue. That way, unrelated issues won't mix up, there will be less noise, those so inclined will actually be able to read and help, and people who just need to do drive-by bashing or praising or chit-chat can do so in Community Cafe.

Well I'll probably make a new one in Maverick, just point out that it's strictly for learning about it and any tech support issues. Any sort of opinion would belong somewhere like here (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=9175014#post9175014). I would think separate threads for each issue would be bad as the Maverick forums would fill up with issues regarding something that might not even be default.

Hopefully the new thread can avoid a pedantic argument over when/how to not use/be forced to use GNOME Shell...

23meg

April 29th, 2010, 05:02 AM

I would think separate threads for each issue would be bad as the Maverick forums would fill up with issues regarding something that might not even be default.

Good point.

On the flipside, 112,354 views and 1740 posts in 1 (mega)thread that keeps popping to the top, for something that was guaranteed not to be default, is also somewhat out of place.

We should perhaps evaluate this after UDS.

Hopefully the new thread can avoid a pedantic argument over when/how to not use/be forced to use GNOME Shell...

Wishful thinking. But it can be moved to CC when it happens.

kyleabaker

April 29th, 2010, 05:50 AM

On the flipside, 112,354 views and 1740 posts in 1 (mega)thread that keeps popping to the top, for something that was guaranteed not to be default, is also somewhat out of place.

We should perhaps evaluate this after UDS.
I agree. This definitely didn't fit for a Lucid forum. I dread seeing the thread in the Maverick Meerkat developmental forum... :/

Merk42

April 29th, 2010, 05:57 AM

I agree. This definitely didn't fit for a Lucid forum. I dread seeing the thread in the Maverick Meerkat developmental forum... :/

I'm curious though. Where WOULD be a good fit then if not the place where a bunch of testers would be? With the thread having so many views/posts I took it as being a good decision to put it here

Didius Falco

April 29th, 2010, 06:15 AM

I'm curious though. Where WOULD be a good fit then if not the place where a bunch of testers would be? With the thread having so many views/posts I took it as being a good decision to put it here

How about "Desktop Environments"?

Personally, I didn't mind it being here, but I think it did cause some FUD among those that assumed it was going to be the default.

Merk42

April 29th, 2010, 06:19 AM

How about "Desktop Environments"?

Personally, I didn't mind it being here, but I think it did cause some FUD among those that assumed it was going to be the default.

...
GNOME Shell will be released in September of 2010 (http://mail.gnome.org/archives/devel-announce-list/2009-November/msg00001.html) so it won't be default until at least 10.10, most likely later.
...

Not my fault they don't read the first post

x-shaney-x

April 29th, 2010, 09:43 AM

I must say this thread has quite suprised me.
There have been so many passionate (rabid even) responses for and against gnome shell.

I don't like it, I think it's horrible in it's CURRENT shape so I simply won't use it but I will keep checking back and see how it progresses. Nobody knows how the finished product will turn out so it's hard to say it will ruin gnome and you will never use it.

I remember all the hullabaloo over KDE4 when people saw the early stages.
No doubt about it, I thought it was awful (same as I feel about gnome shell) and as far as I was concerned KDE was going to be ruined and I tried out gnome in preparation.

As it turned out I liked gnome a lot better and stuck with it but kept checking on KDE4 and when it did finally hit a few distros all my fears were correct, it WAS awful but over time it has improved dramatically.
I still prefer gnome and will stick with it for the foreseeable future but that is more down to personal preference now rather feeling pushed towards it as I did back then.

You really can't judge the future of a DE on the basis of the early stages of an app that may or may not be a default PART of gnome 3 or ubuntu.

Personally, I am more fearful that we will end up using an awful Mac style global menubar in the ubuntu future. It's already earmarked for the netbook edition and although it is supposedly not going to be the default for the desktop edition it WILL be available and wouldn't suprise me it it took over.

Give me gnome shell over that any day.

bash

April 29th, 2010, 11:27 AM

On the flipside, 112,354 views and 1740 posts in 1 (mega)thread that keeps popping to the top, for something that was guaranteed not to be default, is also somewhat out of place.

Wait were actually finally killing the mega-monster-thread?

I'm curious though. Where WOULD be a good fit then if not the place where a bunch of testers would be? With the thread having so many views/posts I took it as being a good decision to put it here

Maybe in a new sub-forum for GNOME Shell in the Development & Programming section called «GNOME-Shell Testing & Discussion» or something along those lines.

I would be for this because the Shell seems to be a topic of importance for a lot of people but currently progresses independently from Ubuntu releases. And there it wouldn't be a problem if each Shell issue or bug got it's own thread.

NCLI

April 29th, 2010, 03:33 PM

Actually I was just thinking whether this thread should be moved to Maverick Testing & Discussion when it opens.
Great idea :)

Why? a lot of the discussion goes in circles and no one new is going to read through 170+ pages. I'll just make a new one in Maverick Testing Forums if need be.
Because this thread is epic, and filled with an incredible amount of information ;)

cariboo907

April 29th, 2010, 06:18 PM

I agree with Merk42 and 23meg, I just threw the idea out to see what people had to say. I would rather see a thread with just technical help, all the opinion posts should go in a separate thread.