Should Ubuntu use Gnome 3.6 or 3.8 for Raring 13.04 ?

[ronacc]

I have to differ, polish and stability is for the LTS, between LTS Ubuntu should be innovative and exploring new technologies including the latest Gnome, maybe even invent own tools or applications as the softwarecenter which happens to be a trend setter.
Windows should never be a concern. If you deliver a OS that's innovative and has trendsetting apps you'll gain users automatically.

I agree with you in general but for the reason I stated I think that they are critical over the current cycle and the next one . Windows is not my concern I have not used it for more than 12 years . I do however keep track of where it is going ( know thy enemy ) and I think that with windows 8 MS has "stepped in it" and this presents us with a good opportunity to gain users .

[Stinger]

@ventrical
I did read Guitara's blog, it has a lot of good ideas that have to be implemented and tested before we can tell if they are improving quality control or not.

It also says:
"Flavors will now have complete control over there releases" but apparently no control when it comes to versions as in Gnome 3.8 ?

Regarding hope.
I can only hope for Ubuntu that the quality of Raring rises to a level where it justifies stability, polish and the exclusion of the upstream Gnome version.

[nuttzo31]

My longest standing problem with ubuntu has always been: bugs, bugs, bugs. They need more stable, polished releases badly, and if this helps with that then I am for it.

I agree ubuntu 12.10 struggles badly because compiz is so slow and buggy when you are minimizing/maximizing windows or closing windows from the spread view. There is still the nvidia bug where the windows are blank when maximizing and that bug is over a year old.

I have an asus p8p67 pro with an i5-2500k with 8gb ram,ssd drive and a nvidia g210(which is no powerhouse but runs windows 7 with full effects just fine) and ubuntu shouldn't struggle so much. They need to work on unity so it is up to the same speed as gnome-shell , 13.04 really needs to be a polish only release in my opinion.

[mc4man]

I do however keep track of where it is going ( know thy enemy ) and I think that with windows 8 MS has "stepped in it" and this presents us with a good opportunity to gain users .

I thought I'd pick up a new laptop today, current one almost 5 yrs.
After spending 30 min with Win 8 it has to be the worst OS I've ever used, couldn't make much sense of it
(nor the laptop which is going back tom., once windows was used for a little while it refused to boot to bios or boot from usb.. without resetting to the factory/as shipped state.

[ronacc]

I think the boot problem there may be a bug MS let get loose . The install I have on one of the hd's in my test box sometimes takes 2,3,or even 4 trys to boot .

edit: I completely agree with your impression , it really is that bad .

[addegsson]

UGR should be built upon the standard Ubuntu repos (IMO) because of the stability you gain with the well tested packages. If you want newer versions you just have to add the Gnome 3 PPA.

[Stinger]

@addegsson
I beg to differ, UGR should follow the Gnome releases and so should Ubuntu to benefit from the upstream Gnome releases.
The packages with the never Gnome would be just as well tested as with the older one as it has the same audience.

I don't think there is any stability issues with Gnome, but because Ubuntu chooses to have it's own versions of the 'System Settings' , onlinie accounts (UOA vs. GOA), compositing window manager (Compiz) and it's own Shell (Unity) etc.
There will be a process of patching and tweaking the involved Gnome components to meet Ubuntu's needs.
This process, I think, is what you all refer to as 'stabilizing' and 'polishing'.
It's an adaption process where Ubuntu has to adapt to the Gnome components because Ubuntu has not produced a complete DE yet and still relies heavily on Gnome to have a complete DE.

It has nothing to do with the quality of the current Gnome version, and I really can't see that UGR would gain any stability at all from such a decision, but it'll gain less users as it looses it's appeal to Gnome fans because of an old Gnome version.

ATM there is no guarantee that Gnome 3.8 will make it into the Gnome3 ppa, because of incompatibility with Unity.

[kansasnoob]

@addegsson
I beg to differ, UGR should follow the Gnome releases and so should Ubuntu to benefit from the upstream Gnome releases.
The packages with the never Gnome would be just as well tested as with the older one as it has the same audience.

I don't think there is any stability issues with Gnome, but because Ubuntu chooses to have it's own versions of the 'System Settings' , onlinie accounts (UOA vs. GOA), compositing window manager (Compiz) and it's own Shell (Unity) etc.
There will be a process of patching and tweaking the involved Gnome components to meet Ubuntu's needs.
This process, I think, is what you all refer to as 'stabilizing' and 'polishing'.
It's an adaption process where Ubuntu has to adapt to the Gnome components because Ubuntu has not produced a complete DE yet and still relies heavily on Gnome to have a complete DE.

It has nothing to do with the quality of the current Gnome version, and I really can't see that UGR would gain any stability at all from such a decision, but it'll gain less users as it looses it's appeal to Gnome fans because of an old Gnome version.

ATM there is no guarantee that Gnome 3.8 will make it into the Gnome3 ppa, because of incompatibility with Unity.

I totally agree with that sentiment. If the Unity devs need more time to adjust work around changes in Gnome then Canonical should tweak it's release cycle

Remember that Dapper was 6.06! With all of the changes in testing - eliminating alphas, etc - it shouldn't be impossible to tweak our release schedule so the gnome and ubuntu devs can truly work in unison again

[philinux]

I'm in the wait and see camp at the moment as things may well change, but just to reiterate the reasons.

The UDS GNOME Plans Review session notes talk about the reasons why Ubuntu 13.04 won't use the latest GNOME by default: Session Notes

tracking unstable GNOME is taking lot of resources
The Ubuntu desktop is quite less "stock GNOME" than it used to be
GNOME unstable series and Ubuntu "working every day" are hard to conciliate goals
GNOME is not communicating early enough on what is coming for us to discuss next cycle at UDS (see nautilus 3.6 in quantal)
GNOME is shipping stables with transitions half done (see gstreamer 1.0 this cycle) which is not something we want in Ubuntu
Our "feedback loop" with GNOME is not really working nowadays

[Stinger]

@philinux

tracking unstable GNOME is taking lot of resources that we don't invest in our desktop (packaging a new stack every 3 weeks, dealing with transitions, regressions, etc)

That should not be new to the developers, they have been tracking Unstable Gnome for quite a few years now.
News are that they are now using a lot of resources patching and tweaking the gnome components to meet Unity's needs, leaving much less resources to track unstable Gnome.

our desktop is quite less "stock GNOME" than it used to be, which means we have extra integration work to do and it's less trivial to do those "on the way" during the cycle

Same as the above, Ubuntu is using too many resources on 'extra integration work' because it's lesser stock Gnome.

GNOME unstable series and Ubuntu "working every day" are hard to conciliate goals

Yes of course, it's like riding two horses going in each their own direction (I posted that earlier on this thread).
Either you follow Gnome or You fork the needed components and make your own Unity DE.
But Ubuntu doesn't seem to have the resources to do so ?

GNOME is not communicating early enough on what is coming for us to discuss next cycle at UDS (see nautilus 3.6 in quantal)

Well Gnome is going through a lot of changes itself so thats not gonna happen before Gnome3 development calms down later in the release cycle, but that was the same with the changes from Gnome1 series to Gnome2 and should be expected in such big change from one series to another. Changes not known at UDS cannot be communicated.

GNOME is shipping stables with transitions half done (see gstreamer 1.0 this cycle) which is not something we want in Ubuntu

Outch ! that one you can blame on Gnome

our "feedback loop" with GNOME is not really working nowadays, they don't have time to look at most bugs and we hit regressions and sit on them until somebody on our side has time to look at them, which means neither GNOME or us benefits much from tracking unstable GNOME...

I am really sad if that's the whole truth, but I guess that's the kinda reaction you get when you expect cooperation from someone that feels your are trying to control and limit their developer freedom.

Cheers