Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57

Thread: Very real bugs in Raring

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Williams Lake
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Just a small correction, Sam is the major developer of compiz, and he is employed specifically to develop compiz by Canonical

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Beans
    228

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Quote Originally Posted by QIII View Post
    Deprecation of a feature is not a bug. "Bug" has a very specific meaning, and that is not it.
    Oh, we are into an argument.
    Everything is written with words, so a person can make mistakes in writing words, and that's called code.

    In any case, you are welcome to express your displeasure the Compiz developers. Don't send your email to Canonical for the Ubuntu developers. It's NOT on them. Compiz does not belong to Canonical.
    http://www.compiz.org/
    Sam has a blog. You might be interested in this particular entry:
    http://smspillaz.wordpress.com/2012/...orted-plugins/
    Tell them they aren't working hard enough.
    This is nothing to do with Compiz, but with Ubuntu devs. They decide what to put in and what to keep out. They make a mistake in their "coding" and suddenly something doesn't work, but still its called "development."

    Interestingly, the MS guys put out a "release" with lot of fanfare and eye-candy and then slowly send out "service packs." And, KB something or other. And, survive too!

    Thanks for the links.

    Have a good day!

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Beans
    228

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Quote Originally Posted by cariboo907 View Post
    Just a small correction, Sam is the major developer of compiz, and he is employed specifically to develop compiz by Canonical
    Aha, then he is doing not enough...don't we need 3D windows...?

    He is not working there anymore http://smspillaz.wordpress.com/
    Last edited by Chdslv; December 16th, 2012 at 07:07 AM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Somewhere...
    Beans
    1,543
    Distro
    Ubuntu 13.10 Saucy Salamander

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Quote Originally Posted by Chdslv View Post
    This is nothing to do with Compiz, but with Ubuntu devs. They decide what to put in and what to keep out. They make a mistake in their "coding" and suddenly something doesn't work, but still its called "development."

    Interestingly, the MS guys put out a "release" with lot of fanfare and eye-candy and then slowly send out "service packs." And, KB something or other. And, survive too!

    Thanks for the links.

    Have a good day!
    So you're saying that the Ubuntu devs could have put in some non-existent plugins that works with the latest Compiz but chose not to? It's not their job that some Compiz plugins don't work with the latest version, it's the Compiz devs' job. Same goes with GNOME and Nautilus. Canonical does not own GNOME, so they can't tell the GNOME folks to put back the missing features. They can't keep the old GNOME either, if so they'll be giving their users outdated softwares.

    You're basically blaming Ubuntu for all the upstream "bugs". I do agree with you that these are genuine problems, but complaining here won't help.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    The Left Coast of the USA
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Kubuntu

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Quote Originally Posted by cariboo907 View Post
    Just a small correction, Sam is the major developer of compiz, and he is employed specifically to develop compiz by Canonical
    Thanks, cariboo907.

    Employed or contracted? I always thought he was more or less an "independent" developer and that Canonical is simply the big consumer of Compiz any more.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chdslv View Post
    Oh, we are into an argument.
    Everything is written with words, so a person can make mistakes in writing words, and that's called code.

    This is nothing to do with Compiz, but with Ubuntu devs. They decide what to put in and what to keep out. They make a mistake in their "coding" and suddenly something doesn't work, but still its called "development."
    You may be in an argument. I'm not. I'm just hanging out on the Forum wasting my beans in the RR forum to entertain myself. (And thinking I need to start digging a bit to find out why Firefox has crashed on me for times in the last hour or so.)

    I simply don't think you are quite understanding that the features you want are not gone because of mistakes in the code -- bugs. They were removed on purpose. Sam has specifically asked for volunteers to help in maintaining the stack for some of those things so they can get back in.

    Removing a feature, no matter how irksome or disappointing, is not a bug.

    I really liked the cube deformation and 3D windows myself. Like to use that eye-candy on people who only use Windows to see if I could interest them in using Linux, too. Too bad for me. And I can't use KDE on my ATI machines to get the same effects. Also too bad for me.

    If I had time, I'd offer to help maintain those things. Unfortunately, I am selfish and would rather pay my mortgage, car payments, dinners out, kid's college tuition ...
    Last edited by QIII; December 16th, 2012 at 07:39 AM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Beans
    228

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Quote Originally Posted by zombifier25 View Post
    So you're saying that the Ubuntu devs could have put in some non-existent plugins that works with the latest Compiz but chose not to?
    Yes, of course!
    They are not non-existent. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Co...Manager#Compiz

    Precise has the stuff, while the forward developed Quantal and Raring doesn't, so the development hadn't helped much.

    You're basically blaming Ubuntu for all the upstream "bugs". I do agree with you that these are genuine problems, but complaining here won't help.
    I use Ubuntu, and I don't ever complain. if you read my other posts, you'd notice that.
    I like Ubuntu since long gone days. I just mentioned real bugs in this post to see, how others look into it.

    I just said bugs, but didn't complain, for I am not the complaining type. Everything is written with words, so someone might make a mistake in writing. And, I am making a statement; development for the sake of development is useless. Six months time limit would always become smaller and smaller, and a release has to come out, and someone has to make things/write codes, and that has to be something new, or there might be no job. Cannonical employs people, and they do the coding, for the pay packet. For pay, one has to show progress and sometimes that progress is regress.

    If the code, or written words had been changed, so that some abilities are cut off, then it is negative development. You don't take away abilities of a growing child, you do everything to add more!

    Now, I don't want to get into an argument with anyone. I only mentioned what I felt, that's all.

    If a application is working, and never breaks, then that program is excellent. You don't "develop" it to lose its abilities. I have an application, written even before Maverick, somewhere in 2007, which works in all releases from Lucid to Raring. It works in any Debian based distro too. It means it is universal.

    No developer had tried to "develop" it further, and thanks heavens for that. Someone tried to fork it and can't get his distro out with the "developed" application for last 2 years.

    I downloaded it, both the 32 and 64bit. I don't want to change it, develop it, or even read the code. It simply works and that's all there is to that.

    The idea is not to break excellent applications, but keep them, don't touch them, don't develop them, don't even read the code. Just leave it and it'd continue to work. But, develop the other stuff, which needs developing, and adapt it to whatever you make.

    Every wheel is round, at least on this Earth, and there no square wheels. If the number 3.4.2 is working very well, there is no need for 3.6.2 with some subtractions. If Compiz 0.8x is working well, don't touch it and don't update it, and don't even maintain it, just leave it in the repos for downloading. If 0.9.x is not that good, scrap it.

    Quantal is already old and lost its usefulness as Raring is on the way. All these xx.10s are like that, just transitional, and forgotten very quickly.

    I don't want to get into an argument. These are only my thoughts.

    If anyone had noticed a real bug, I'd like to know, so I can stay out of trouble. Anyway, Raring had not given me any trouble at all, except for those I mentioned, and they are not that big trouble too. There are so many non-distro specific file managers around, Gnome-commander, Midnight-commander, Sunflower etc with the original 2 panes.

    Take care, guys!
    And have a good day!

    Ch
    Last edited by Chdslv; December 16th, 2012 at 08:31 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Beans
    228

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Quote Originally Posted by QIII View Post
    You may be in an argument. I'm not. I'm just hanging out on the Forum wasting my beans in the RR forum to entertain myself. (And thinking I need to start digging a bit to find out why Firefox has crashed on me for times in the last hour or so.)
    You don't waste beans, they get automatically added.
    Funny, I never had a single crash of Firefox so many years. Maybe, it simply likes me.

    Removing a feature, no matter how irksome or disappointing, is not a bug.
    It is a bug, not in the application, but in the head of the developer. He thinks there is a bug and try to remove it from an excellently working application and kills it.

    You noticed that Unity 2d is not available now, but few files are there with unity2d name in the /usr/bin. Why should it be there? Unity2d is not there, and it is there.

    So, shall we delete them? Oh, Unity might not work?
    Why? Unity2d is not there, right?
    For Unity3d to work, something of Unity2d must be there. Then, why take away Unity2d?
    Bug?
    Yes, bug in the thinking of some developer...

    Why not use Compiz 0.8.x? Oh, yes, but 9 is larger than 8, so it shows progress.
    Why not use Nautilus 3.4.2? Because 6 is larger than 4 and shows progress.
    [/quote]

    Good day, pal!
    Ch

    PS: Compiz devs own words; The 0.8.x version of compiz is stable and mostly feature complete in the sense that it is less likely to fail and currently receiving only maintenance updates. The 0.9.x version of compiz is in an unstable state, which means it is more likely to exhibit bugs and crashes.

    In Quantal and Raring what do we have? The 0.9.x series. Who decided to put it there? The Ubuntu devs, disregarding what the Compiz devs warnings.
    Last edited by Chdslv; December 16th, 2012 at 08:54 AM.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Mystletainn Kick!
    Beans
    4,481
    Distro
    Ubuntu 12.04 Precise Pangolin

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Have you filed bug reports for any of the items listed?
    Personally, I don't think any of them, with an exception for apport, are bugs.
    Splat Double Splat Triple Splat
    Earn Your Keep
    Don't mind me, I'm only passing through.
    Once in a blue moon, I'm actually helpful
    .

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    The Left Coast of the USA
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Kubuntu

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    I am not arguing with you. If I were, you would know it and I would have long ago been kicked off this forum as I have been on many others. I have been at this techie gig for a long time. I simply think you appear to be expressing a rather naive understanding of how this all works and you appear to have also made personal value judgements about those who develop the code. What you have identified may indeed be troublesome, but many things in life are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chdslv View Post
    ... but keep them, don't touch them, don't develop them, don't even read the code ...
    It simply does not work that way. It didn't work that way 35+ years ago when I started doing this stuff and it doesn't work that way now. Code must be maintained as the world changes around it. That some things continue to work for a long time does not mean that everything will. Furthermore, just because something is stable and works exactly as it did 10 years ago is not necessarily a good thing. There is a context. If the context changes and the software, application or system does not, then it may continue doing what it did, but it will have lost its value. In the new context, it does not work well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chdslv View Post
    It is a bug, not in the application, but in the head of the developer. He thinks there is a bug and try to remove it from an excellently working application and kills it.
    No. Things get removed for any number of reasons. In the industry there are many reasons to deprecate the use of old things or remove them entirely. Again: the term "bug" has a specific meaning and this is not it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chdslv View Post
    PS: Compiz devs own words; The 0.8.x version of compiz is stable and mostly feature complete in the sense that it is less likely to fail and currently receiving only maintenance updates. The 0.9.x version of compiz is in an unstable state, which means it is more likely to exhibit bugs and crashes.
    PS: Ubuntu is leading edge. Not bleeding edge, but it is leading edge and sometimes even cutting edge. That means that some things that are perhaps less than perfectly stable will be included. If you thought otherwise, then perhaps the semi-annual versions are not for you. The LTS versions tend to be less cutting edge.

    In the case of Compiz, which is so tightly married to the graphical interface, leaving it alone would be the worst thing to do. As the IU is improved, as things like X Server change, Compiz plugins must be actively maintained to ensure that they work with the new state.

    Plugins need to be maintained and brought along to keep up. In the example of 3D Windows, there were simply not enough resources to do that. The fact that it was taken from the code stack is a pretty good indication that there was work that needed to be done on it to keep it up, or it simply would not have been removed. That wasn't a whim. That was a decision based on what was most likely to be useful to the greatest number of users and what could be left behind with the least disruption to users.

    It is also extremely expensive to maintain several code stacks that have to be maintained independently, so in my industry it is simply necessary to cut dead weight to be able to keep up. You can't always maintain the old and be able to move forward with the new.

    It IS frustrating and disappointing when things you like disappear and you certainly have every right to be frustrated and disappointed. But that does not constitute a bug, nor does it mean the developers are not doing their jobs.

    It means that decisions was made in consideration of what resources were available and what product features were most likely to be important to preserve.
    Last edited by QIII; December 16th, 2012 at 09:31 AM.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Somewhere...
    Beans
    1,543
    Distro
    Ubuntu 13.10 Saucy Salamander

    Re: Very real bugs in Raring

    Quote Originally Posted by Chdslv View Post
    You noticed that Unity 2d is not available now, but few files are there with unity2d name in the /usr/bin. Why should it be there? Unity2d is not there, and it is there.

    So, shall we delete them? Oh, Unity might not work?
    Why? Unity2d is not there, right?
    For Unity3d to work, something of Unity2d must be there. Then, why take away Unity2d?
    Bug?
    Yes, bug in the thinking of some developer...
    Just a quick guess, it's some old and deprecated configs that apply to both Unity and Unity 2D.

    If a application is working, and never breaks, then that program is excellent. You don't "develop" it to lose its abilities. I have an application, written even before Maverick, somewhere in 2007, which works in all releases from Lucid to Raring. It works in any Debian based distro too. It means it is universal.

    No developer had tried to "develop" it further, and thanks heavens for that. Someone tried to fork it and can't get his distro out with the "developed" application for last 2 years.

    I downloaded it, both the 32 and 64bit. I don't want to change it, develop it, or even read the code. It simply works and that's all there is to that.

    The idea is not to break excellent applications, but keep them, don't touch them, don't develop them, don't even read the code. Just leave it and it'd continue to work. But, develop the other stuff, which needs developing, and adapt it to whatever you make.

    Every wheel is round, at least on this Earth, and there no square wheels. If the number 3.4.2 is working very well, there is no need for 3.6.2 with some subtractions. If Compiz 0.8x is working well, don't touch it and don't update it, and don't even maintain it, just leave it in the repos for downloading. If 0.9.x is not that good, scrap it.
    It's a sad fact, but softwares are developed to do one function, and do it well, and do it well through the advances of time. It's not to the developers' interest that it contains old extra features that some old users may still use, it's to make the software modern and usable. Some may argue that Windows' Start menu is never broken, and Microsoft should never switch to Metro in the first place. Sure, it may not be the intent of all developers (Xfce, LXDE, etc.), but it's the intent of a large portion of them (case in point: KDE 4, GNOME Shell, Unity, Windows 8, iTunes 11, Facebook interface changes, etc. etc.)

    Not arguing with you, just stating a fact
    Last edited by zombifier25; December 16th, 2012 at 09:08 AM.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •