Vote Here to voice your support for an official Gnome Shell version of Ubuntu

[jeremiah4]

The Gnome devs had the opportunity to include the Unity appindicators API in Gnome shell and they flatly refused and claimed that it was all Canonical's fault for not asking in the first place. This is why Unity is the Ubuntu default without Gnome shell being a log in option.

http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/date/2011/03

Why should Canonical pay its developers to work on Gnome shell when the Gnome developers will make all the decisions without regard to the wishes of Ubuntu? And if anyone wants to bring up another old argument about Canonical not helping to develop a Wayland compositor then read these reason why last year a Wayland developer has forked Wayland/Weston into Northfield/Norwood and then imagine Canonical trying to get changes to the Wayland protocol that will help make a Ubuntu phone/tablet work.

Regards.

Many good responses to my OP, I see... A lot of useful information presented. Mainly, one user posted numerous times exactly what I posited - shipping the official Ubuntu ISO with DE 'options' right out of the box - such as 'Gnome Shell, Unity, KDE, etc.' After all, the DE doesn't exactly take up huge space on an .iso. Also, it would be nice, instead of having to install hundreds of different versions of 'buntu third party spins' until you found the one you like, for Conanical to just 'offer it up front'.

I can see your all's points - having to maintain a third party 'release schedule', having to 'help out with development', 'not in the community/conanical/whatever's best interests', etc.

But in this response we can see the reason why I had to install literally dozens of different linux distro until I wound up with something I like. Here's the reasons:

1. Every 'community' is their way or the highway. Any third party interaction with every community doesn't get to make any decisions regarding development or direction. It's not actually a community-driven process. It's company driven, but with the LGPL allowance for anyone to 'take your work' and 'make any derivative works, redistribute, etc. without limitation or royalty.'

2. Every linux distribution is the same as #1 - the decisions regarding the development, direction, and anything that happens at any level of development is solely up to the 'community', i.e. distro company.

What these sorts of things do is cut off all third party development on any form of product, and instead forces anyone who wants to do anything different to come up with their own 'flavor', 'spin', whatever you want to call it.

This is why we have 1,000 different versions of linux, why I had to install dozens of different .iso's over and over after 'Unity', and when we ask what the community would like to see - which was simply 'just offer us the flexibility to do whatever we want without having to resort to entering hundreds of commands and try to maintain the thousands of package relationships so we can arrive at any system, without forcing us to do it in ways that could easily break the system.'

For example, my first try at ubuntu gnome shell was to install the latest version of Ubuntu Unity, then install gnome shell. I followed online steps just in case I would have done something wrong or there were extra steps I didn't know about, for example, does gnome shell break unity? What happened was the computer crashed in the middle of installation and that killed both the new gnome shell install and unity. Had to reinstall. Lucky I have old copies.

If development in the linux world was done properly, if I want to try out a different DE I should just be able to install it - and it doesn't 'break anything else'.

What I am saying is simple: Why did I need to resort to a year-long '.iso burning and installation exercise'? I understand the reasons why the community thinks this, along with conanical's best interests, are to do it's own thing.

But what linux should do is instead of being a free-for-all, learn from things like Gnome Shell. Allow for extendability. In essence, we have all of these 'packages'. But a lot of times they interfere with one-another. What we should have instead is an 'extension-based system', along with an 'evolutionary system'.

If, for example, we did the latter, where like Gnome-shell you can get exactly what you want just by installing 'extensions', and built linux around that model, suddenly we can simply allow the original designers (Gnome, Conanical) to concentrate on what they want to do, so long as they provide the building blocks for some third party to turn it into something else - entirely even - where say, if you install gnome shell, you can then install anything you want to turn it into exactly what you want - Instead of having to resort to download hundreds of .iso's and install each separately until you finally arrive at something you do like. The reason is because everyone's personal preferences are different. People have different tastes - we should allow for that..

What we should be able to do is have basically an evolving development model that doesn't lead to 1,000 freaking distros - but rather a few, and from those few you are able to do anything you want - without having to worry about what packages interfere with what, or installing something breaks something else, and it should be pretty much just like installing extensions on gnome shell or installing software - you just install the MF.

But I digress... Just like most people said on here, linux actually needs a redesign to get rid of this problem, not just DE-wars. That said, I see no reason why Ubuntu can't provide one .iso, and from that one .iso it is as simple as entering one command that gives you an entire DE of your choice, without breaking anything, that you can choose on log-in, and also without having to dual-boot, or debug commands for days until you have everything working in-sync.

I know you can already do this, but consider those who do it this old-fashioned way consider themselves 'advanced users' just because they fiddle with the command line long enough and browse the web long enough to figure out how to get things running properly without breaking their system.

Sure, Ubuntu has come a long way. But really, things like this are why we have 'linux mint', which is allegedly right now more popular that any Ubuntu distribution, and is made up of only a handful of developers...

Can't never did nothing - never will. That's all I have to say looking back on this post. Both sides made points, but in the end it looks like Ubuntu is actually not so different from Gnome - both only consider their own 'interests', and not their community, but rather their 'business'... I think that says it right there.

BTW - if this post irritates the mods, I would be perfectly happy, if insulted enough, to go right back to a different distro - it really doesn't matter to me, because I can arrive at this same exact system without Ubuntu. I'm irritiated at these 'communites' that are driven by 'popularity contests' and 'cool nerds/dudes/dudettes'. If you are a company, act like one and keep your little 'communities' under control. If you can't do so, there's no reason to interact with any of you...

Naight!

[LastDino]

I'm actually getting confused, what do you mean by when you say there should be on the disk Ubuntu Gnome DE available? And how is it any different then what we have as Ubuntu Gnome 14.04?

By the way, I'm posting this from Ubuntu Gnome 14.04 which was installed directly from the source above, I did not need to install or remove anything extra in order to get Gnome DE. And I know nothing about Linux to try and install Gnome DE by adding different packages.

Like I said, I'm getting confused, so ignore me but this sounds like you're trying to climb a non-exiting wall.

[grumblebum2]

Still haven't seen a good reason to include GNOME-shell in the ISO other than it's
your favorite DE.

[jeremiah4]

I'm actually getting confused, what do you mean by when you say there should be on the disk Ubuntu Gnome DE available? And how is it any different then what we have as Ubuntu Gnome 14.04?

By the way, I'm posting this from Ubuntu Gnome 14.04 which was installed directly from the source above, I did not need to install or remove anything extra in order to get Gnome DE. And I know nothing about Linux to try and install Gnome DE by adding different packages.

Like I said, I'm getting confused, so ignore me but this sounds like you're trying to climb a non-exiting wall.

I can understand the confusion. There was a lot packed into one statement. Here's a clearer picture:

1. Currently, only what is in the best interests of any DE, linux distro, or 'company' that does anything with linux doesn't actually involve a 'community'. Rather, they have their own community within their own organization. To get my point here - have you ever wanted to contribute code to Ubuntu? You'll wind up being a 'package maintainer' for years. Every distro is the same way - there actually isn't any 'community-driven development', as originally invisioned by Linus...

2. Because of #1, when anybody wants something 'different' - i.e. new idea, new direction, slightly different or completely different this or that, whether it is a DE or kernel, whatever, they have to make their own 'spin' or 'flavor' or 'distro'. That's a bad cycle that creates tons of distributions, versions, and types of linux - which is actually a major problem because of what I have to say in #3:

3. Because of 1 & 2, if you want to use linux, you are first faced with literally hundreds of different 'OS options', but all under the 'linux flag.' The only option you have is to see what other poeple are using, install a handful of different distros, until you arrive at one that suits your 'preferences, styles, and likeness'... This leads us to #4:

4. There are basically two different major distributions, and the reason is you can't load two kernels at once - RHEL-based and Debian-based. However, on both systems you can have the ability to arrive at any DE, as long as you go through the major painful process of getting everything to work together - for example, installing a KDE AND gnome environment together, without sharing apps (this is slightly possible), without breaking your system, and being able to choose one at login prompt. The easiest system to do this with is actually Debian, but still, its a major pain. But this shows us something - if the community acted as separate parts to a whole, we can now eliminate 1-3.

5. Eliminating 1-3 means instead of providing a different .iso just to try out some different 'version of linux', we can correct how we develop linux kernels and DEs. The goal should be to learn from what is currently going on in Gnome Shell. Right now with Gnome Shell, I can actually override every feature Gnome Shell offers - along with any extension third party offers - along with allowing for any extension gnome shell offers to work in either the same way or a slightly different way. This is done because of their choice to use javascript as a code base and convert that to native binary. It's actually a good development model - it provides the flexibility we need to basically roll any type of gnome shell we want - which means gnome shell could be any DE, without breaking the original gnome shell in any way. This is how we eliminate 1-3 and also 4, if we did similar tactics with the kernel. This leads us to our final answer, #6:

6. Instead of forcing the community to band together behind 'distros', 'flavors', 'favorite OS, kernel, or DE', we just let the community do its thing, as long as they do it right. So instead of forcing people to try out all the currently most popular distros every 5 years, they can just choose between 2 or 3, and just install any DE, extension to DE, flavor of DE, etc. and the same with parts of a kernel, with only one command (instead of hundreds until you get everything right), and there you have it: each 'company and little community' can concentrate on what they want, every other developer can develop any add-on, extension, or flavor, and if you get what I'm laying down for you - just like gnome shell you can arrive at literally endless things with only one major linux distribution.

That's the direction that I think Linus Torvalds orginally invisioned, instead of this ra-ra stuff.

So in sum, I should be able to download one Ubuntu .iso, or debian .iso, and arrive at linux mint if I want, or KDE, and/or Unity, and/or Gnome shell, and/or Xfce, etc - without having to ever re-install a single time, and it should never produce any compatibility issues or errors.

I said all of this after reviewing other people's posts to my OP. In my OP, I stated there shouldn't be any issue with Ubuntu providing a supported Gnome Shell version. What people cited as 'supported' were not 'official' - they are spin-offs that could be rather problematic, and it requires an entirely different group to maintain everything. Linux Mint is no different - much smaller group, much less support, not nearly as funded, yet currently more popular. Elementary OS is another one I looked at...

But all of this back-and-forth and 'we want this/can't do this/won't do that' kind of stuff is really a self-imposed result of individual GNU-based 'communities' that are building things in such a nature as that none of it works as GNU intended for it - development is closed off to the community, the community really has no say in anything, etc. This would imply that these 'communities' are actually 'businesses', but in reality the only successful 'business' is RHEL - every other distro struggles to make any real or lasting revenues.

That changes if you move to this model and style of development. I proposed this instead of my OP after seeing what others had to say as input. Originally, I stated it should be no problem for Ubuntu to officially provide any DE with only one .iso. As people voiced their opinions, I was forced to abandon my OP and simply state - as a linux community moving forward we need to learn from what has gone wrong, what is currently going on, and what we could do to fix it all so it's no longer a problem.

I know it's confusing and a little hard to wrap heads around, but this pretty much sums it up. Thx...

[LastDino]

That post should have been your opening post. Your opening post basically translates to ''post your votes to tell Ubuntu to do xyz because I (and possibly you) like it''

I do get what you're thinking, belive me I'm only recent migrant and I've 30GB section of my HD full with just different Linux distros, not only that I've 4 installed on my HD atm.

Your central idea of ''gaining ability to move from one DE to another DE should be as simple as putting command'' is actually something I would love to see as well, especially considering how I spent considerable time on Youtube and reading reviews to find out which distro to ''try out'' (Not even settle for), it is extremly confusing for newbies in the storm of 1000's of different distro's and sites like Distrowatch only confuse you more.

However, that is an ideal scenario, I'm no programmer or even know enough about computers to say ''xyz'' is caused by ''abc'' for sure, but even I can tell that; that is going to be as difficult as destroying one big ever growing mountain and putting it back together stone by stone. Simple reason for that is, it is putting constraint of so called ''freedom of doing what they want if able'' everyone so much enjoys with Linux. Unlike windows, where everything is under copy right and no one has any freedom, and even then, I've my doubts about them knowing what they are doing and their ability to achieve this level of balance. Not to mention; it is not paid project, so it would be bit silly of company A to always depend on other n-number of companies which may vary from one single developer to thousands of them. In the current situation, even shifting from one DE to another on one single parent distro is likely to break lot of things, forget about doing something like Mint<->Ubuntu<->Elemntry<->or W/e.

Just my two cents, but there is large gap between having an idea and having an achievable idea. While yours is not bad, man power required to do that is not feasible.

[Tar_Ni]

Personally, as a Linux laymen, I like the current model of Canonical Ubuntu.

It's important mention that Canonical is a compagny, and so yes it's a business developping an open-source Linux OS. Ubuntu aims to the general public and enterprise looking for a solid and free alternative to Windows and Mac system. If I choose Ubuntu it's because I like the OS, it's user-friendly approach and the support behind it, If I wouldn't I would choose something else more to my liking. That's about it.. You don't need to be a computer expert to install and enjoy Ubuntu, which is crucial if you want it to be deployed beyond the long-time initiated Linux user base.

Canonical is the only tech compagny at this point moving forward developping a convergeance for the desktop, mobile and tablet world. With this ambitious strategy it's especially important to a have a focus, a coherence and that is Unity. You just can go about maintaining 3 or 5 DE when you are looking for cross-platform consistence.

http://www.phonearena.com/news/Ubunt...and-PC_id52554

In any case, what you are talking about kind of exists, for those who like the idea:

Cubuntu a French project (unoffical) might be to your liking, shipping Cinnamon, Unity and Gnome out of the box.

http://www.cubuntu.fr/

So yes, Linux is about choices and projects, it's about communities of devoted developpers and users. If you are a XFCE fan and wants to enjoy the support of Ubuntu, you'll go toward Xubuntu, a KDK enthousiasm then Kubuntu is your place ect. In the end, they are all using Ubuntu as a basis.

[cariboo]

It seems to me that the op thinks that just because he likes one DE, everyone else should use it to. In most cases it takes less time to install a DE, than it probably did to compose your last post. As for installing several different distributions, to test the different DEs, It seems you have gone about it from the standpoint of someone that really hasn't learned to use any distribution. I won't bother to count, but the Debian/Ubuntu repositories already contain all the DEs you have tried, and several more that you never even knew existed.

As for a Distributions using a specific DE, there has to be one installed by default, or you wouldn't have been able to try as many as you did. I'd suggest that if there were a truly community run distribution, it would never release anything, as there would just be too many different opinions on what it should contain. Someone has to take control, or there would be so much endless discussion nothing would ever get done. Just have a look at all the different opinions here in this sub-forum.

[malspa]

Still haven't seen a good reason to include GNOME-shell in the ISO other than it's
your favorite DE.

I think that giving the user the choice to log into Unity or GNOME Shell (without having to add GNOME Shell later) is a good reason to include it in the ISO. Other people don't think that's a good reason, and that's fine. Differences of opinion. For me, personally, it would be great because I add GNOME Shell to Ubuntu anyway. But it's also not that big of a deal because... I add GNOME Shell to Ubuntu anyway.

Looking around at other distros, there are some that ship with more than one environment. There are people out there who like that sort of thing. It isn't like anyone's being forced to use any of the other environments that the distro ships with; it's just putting them out there for the user's convenience. I don't see a problem with that.

I also think it would great if Linux Mint shipped an ISO that included both Cinnamon and MATE -- even though there's already a Cinnamon ISO and a MATE ISO available, and even though it's easy enough to, for example, add MATE to your Mint Cinnamon installation. A Cinnamon/Mint hybrid ISO would be attractive to quite a few users; in the same way, a Unity/GNOME Shell hybrid ISO would be attractive to quite a few users. (Not sure if "hybrid" is the correct word to use there, but you get the idea.)

For me, whenever a distro includes, out of the box, more than one environment to log into, that's a bonus. No, something like that isn't "necessary," but in cases where a distro's devs have decided to do it, it has always seemed like a nice touch to me.

[grumblebum2]

Why should a commercial concern add unnecessary complication and size to their ISO when
it's a simple task to download another DE.
These sorts of posts in the most part come from people who don't like or don't use
Unity anyway.
It's your problem not theirs.

[malspa]

Why should a commercial concern add unnecessary complication and size to their ISO when
it's a simple task to download another DE.
These sorts of posts in the most part come from people who don't like or don't use
Unity anyway.
It's your problem not theirs.

Whatever. It isn't a major problem or anything like that.

You know what, like I said, it's no big deal. Some of us think it would be a nice thing, that's all. Wow, you'd think it was a proposal to take something away that's near and dear to people.

You can be sure that whenever someone has an idea, someone else will come up with all kinds of negative stuff about why it's a bad idea. I guess it's human nature.

And you're wrong about one thing: "These sorts of posts in the most part come from people who don't like or don't use Unity anyway."

Nope. I think Unity's great, and I use it a lot. If I didn't, I certainly wouldn't bother with using Ubuntu at all. I'm just not one of those people who remains devoted to only one environment (or only one distro, for that matter). You might not like it, but there are lots of us out there who are like that.