gnome.org · Domains · Slashdot Mirror

Re:Hurray for KDE by Skeezix · 2000-10-12 02:51 · Score: 3 · on KDE 2.0 Final Release Candidate Is Out

I must commend KDE for not only putting out a terrific product, but in staying free of big-money influences. While Miguel de Icaza wallows in his corporate GNOME Foundation and does everything in his power to turn GNOME into Windows Linux Edition, KDE continues to be volunteer-designed, volunteer-coded, and volunteer-driven.

I think you're slightly out of touch with what drives the Gnome project and what the foundation is based on. I suggest you go to The Gnome Foundation site and browse. In particular, read the mission and charter. The Gnome Foundation is not driven by "big-money influences" in the sense you are implying. I'll also mention that Gnome also relies heavily on its volunteers, of which I am one. There are those who are paid for hacking on Gnome (what on earth is wrong with that? sounds like a dream job to me...do something you love and get paid for it!). Most of those hackers started out as unpaid volunteers working because they love what they do. Now they have the opportunity to devote much more time to the project because their income comes from doing what they love to do--promote, hack, design in the Gnome world. As for the corporate backing which you so heavily criticize, I fail to see the reason it is a bad thing. Again I suggest you read the charter so you fully understand the role that companies such as Sun, HP, IBM and others will play. The Gnome Foundation Elections are coming up, so register now if you've contributed in any way to Gnome (advocacy, documentation, code, debugging, artwork, etc.) Cheerio!
----

Re:Hurray for KDE by Skeezix · 2000-10-12 02:51 · Score: 3 · on KDE 2.0 Final Release Candidate Is Out

I must commend KDE for not only putting out a terrific product, but in staying free of big-money influences. While Miguel de Icaza wallows in his corporate GNOME Foundation and does everything in his power to turn GNOME into Windows Linux Edition, KDE continues to be volunteer-designed, volunteer-coded, and volunteer-driven.

I think you're slightly out of touch with what drives the Gnome project and what the foundation is based on. I suggest you go to The Gnome Foundation site and browse. In particular, read the mission and charter. The Gnome Foundation is not driven by "big-money influences" in the sense you are implying. I'll also mention that Gnome also relies heavily on its volunteers, of which I am one. There are those who are paid for hacking on Gnome (what on earth is wrong with that? sounds like a dream job to me...do something you love and get paid for it!). Most of those hackers started out as unpaid volunteers working because they love what they do. Now they have the opportunity to devote much more time to the project because their income comes from doing what they love to do--promote, hack, design in the Gnome world. As for the corporate backing which you so heavily criticize, I fail to see the reason it is a bad thing. Again I suggest you read the charter so you fully understand the role that companies such as Sun, HP, IBM and others will play. The Gnome Foundation Elections are coming up, so register now if you've contributed in any way to Gnome (advocacy, documentation, code, debugging, artwork, etc.) Cheerio!
----

Re:Hurray for KDE by Skeezix · 2000-10-12 02:51 · Score: 3 · on KDE 2.0 Final Release Candidate Is Out

I must commend KDE for not only putting out a terrific product, but in staying free of big-money influences. While Miguel de Icaza wallows in his corporate GNOME Foundation and does everything in his power to turn GNOME into Windows Linux Edition, KDE continues to be volunteer-designed, volunteer-coded, and volunteer-driven.

I think you're slightly out of touch with what drives the Gnome project and what the foundation is based on. I suggest you go to The Gnome Foundation site and browse. In particular, read the mission and charter. The Gnome Foundation is not driven by "big-money influences" in the sense you are implying. I'll also mention that Gnome also relies heavily on its volunteers, of which I am one. There are those who are paid for hacking on Gnome (what on earth is wrong with that? sounds like a dream job to me...do something you love and get paid for it!). Most of those hackers started out as unpaid volunteers working because they love what they do. Now they have the opportunity to devote much more time to the project because their income comes from doing what they love to do--promote, hack, design in the Gnome world. As for the corporate backing which you so heavily criticize, I fail to see the reason it is a bad thing. Again I suggest you read the charter so you fully understand the role that companies such as Sun, HP, IBM and others will play. The Gnome Foundation Elections are coming up, so register now if you've contributed in any way to Gnome (advocacy, documentation, code, debugging, artwork, etc.) Cheerio!
----

Re:MFC for what? by Carnage4Life · 2000-09-30 23:25 · Score: 2 · on Porting From MFC To GTK

I have been using Visual C++ for years and have never needed to use MFC for anything. Granted I don't code user interface stuff... but please. With STL there to help out I see no need at all for MFC.

Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about, MFC is a UI library while the STL is a collection of data structures, iterators and algorithms. They are practically unrelated.

PS: I saw this story earlier at the GNOME site, check it out for more insight into porting issues by GNOME hackers.

Second Law of Blissful Ignorance

Re:Maybe yes by zantispam · 2000-09-19 22:42 · Score: 3 · on Developing "Nth-Tier" Web Applications For Unix?

Jakarta/Tomcat is a nice servlet container with jsp support. jserv is another servlet container. I personally prefer Tomcat because it's quite a bit easier to set up. For a full CORBA implementation, hook either container into ORBit, the Gnome ORB.

For full-on EJB (J2EE) support, try Allaire's JRun. Though not free in any sense of the word, it is a fully integrated EJB container and app server.

Leverage Frameworks - Post Only Subversive Parts by goingware · 2000-09-09 11:21 · Score: 2 · on Developing Subversive Software?

I suggest that you minimize the amount of explicitly subversive code (and also your development workload) by making use of readily available frameworks.

It's preferable if these are open source, but they don't have to be to suit your purpose; for example Metrowerks PowerPlant is the most popular application framework for the MacOS, and although it is a commercial product it is inexpensively available and when you do buy the Codewarrior development system you get the PowerPlant source code on the installation disk.

You can even develop an open source framework yourself and publish it openly, and invite in contributors publicly, and distribute non-subversive demo and test programs. Alternatively, you can add functionality to frameworks that almost suit the purpose and submit your patches back to the original maintainers.

This will save you work, although you may have to write "adapters" to be able to use someone else's library for your own purposes, it will increase reliability of your product, because the framework will have already been debugged by someone else and also tested under a wider variety of circumstances than it will encounter in your code, and you can concentrate your work on the particularly subversive parts.

Then you post only the "interesting" parts of your source code, and provide hyperlinks to the needed application frameworks in your build instructions. Be sure to include the version numbers needed for this build of your program, and if the sources to any of the frameworks are signed with a public key, include the key which those sources were signed with when you got them. That way you can be sure future programmers can rebuild the same program as you did.

It may well be that you have a large application but only a few source files and some build instructions to upload, which could be done off a floppy disk at a public access terminal. If you upload these to a few free webhosting service pages, then email the URL to a bunch of warez site maintainers, your code will be looked after.

Note: to find lots of warez sites (and even more serialz sites) go to Altavista, click on "Advanced Search" and enter:

download and warez and photoshop and illustrator and crack

Probably only 10% of the sites you find will actually have live warez (they get taken down quickly) but some patient hunting will find you any software title you want - but of course your objective here is to contact the warez site maintainers so they can introduce your program into their archive system.

Note that if you want to build a Windows application you can build it with Cygwin (a GNU shell environment for Windows including gcc) so you can be sure Microsoft doesn't embed Globally Unique Identifiers in your code. I'd also suggest that when you make a windows build, you buy a brand-new copy of windows 98 (pay cash), install it on a freshy formatted hard drive, build your binary, upload it, low-level format the hard disk you built it on and throw away the Windows 98 installation disk and all the materials that came with it. It's probably hard to get away with installing a development system on a public access terminal.

If you don't want to use a public access terminal (after all, you might be recorded on a surveillance camera, or the coffee shop waiters might remember you skulking around), then use Zero Knowledge Systems' Freedom to anonymize your web access.

Note that the way Freedom works is your HTTP packets are multiply encrypted with the public keys of the Freedom Network's servers, then "unwrapped" one by one as they pass through up to three servers until they are passed unencrypted to the public net at a faraway place.

Freedom provides both anonymous web browsing and anonymous email send and receive.

Some sources for open source libraries:

While all free software provides it source code, not all programs provide source code that is suitable for use as libraries. Unless you want to go to a lot of extra trouble, it's probably best to look for ready-to-use libraries that are packaged as such, rather than trying to extract code from a complete program. Unless the original application developer went to extra trouble to make components of his program able to stand on their own, it is usually difficult to extract parts of a program out and use them as a library, except perhaps for little snippets.

On the other hand, when you write new code, it is definitely worth while to snip out little bits and make sure that they will compile and run on their own, or depend only on other readily available libraries. That way you can create a library yourself.

The book More C++ Gems has some articles on Large-Scale Software Architecture that discusses reducing cyclic dependencies in software projects, in part so that the projects can be rebuilt faster but also so that they can be unit tested in smaller parts and the parts can be extracted out and reused in other programs - although the claim is often made that object-oriented software is more reusable, this claim is baseless unless good engineering practices are observed.

Re:format string attack - not so old by Emil+Brink · 2000-09-07 15:00 · Score: 2 · on Various *nix OSes Open To Format String Attacks

Um, yeah. Too bad many of the vulnerabilities seem to be in programs where you don't want more external dependencies. Otherwise, people could just get into the habit of using g_snprintf(), from (the other) glib. If you can't guess what it does, check the API reference entry. In new programs I write, that often use glib, I always use this function in place of a simple strcpy() or libc-supplied snprintf()...

Dooh! Dia uses XML w/SVG *NATIVELY*! by BitMan · 2000-09-06 07:42 · Score: 2 · on Free Software for Scalable Vector Graphics?

Of course I couldn't put the obvious together until I actually read the SVG spec. Dia uses the SVG language natively for its XML methods. This example of a horizontal LED "shape" cited on the GnomeOffice home page for Dia is XML w/SVG.

So if it uses XML w/SVG natively, exports most major vector formats, is lean and mean like the GIMP, why use anything else?
[ After using it for ~6 months now, Dia still continues to amaze me! I've just used it for it's EPS export capabilities with LyX. ]

-- Bryan "TheBS" Smith

GTK+ based Dia! Comes with most Gnome distros. by BitMan · 2000-09-06 07:29 · Score: 5 · on Free Software for Scalable Vector Graphics?

I use the GTK+ based Dia (Diagram Editor) all the time. It's kinda like Visio and I find it even more intelligent in design (as did a few of my co-workers who use Visio). It comes with any Gnome bearing distro, and is part of the HelixCode HelixCode distro as well. I believe the latest version is v0.85 (just auto-updated my HelixGnome the other day).

Dia is extremly fast, powerful and flat out elegant IMHO. Dia is the vector graphics equivalent of GIMP, looks and acts very familiar. The native file format (.dia) is actually XML-based and quite extensible. All-in-all, I cannot find much wrong with any part of its design or implementation.

In fact, the only thing it lacks is a wealth of templates and object libraries (although there a some good base libraries, they are small). This, of course, can be easily added by regularly users over time.
[ Hey everybody, there's an OSS project you can easily contribute too! Help create a rich object library for Dia! ]

FYI, Dia can export the following vector formats:

CGM (Computer Graphics Metafile)
DXF (Drawing Interchange Format)
EPS/EPSI (Enscapsulated Postscript)
PNG (Portable Network Graphics)
SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics)
TEX (TeX PSTricks Macros)

Using LyX and Dia, I can export both PS+EPS (easily converted in PDF) and HTML+PNG (or HTML+SVG) documents from the same original document in LyX+Dia (and the EPS graphics created in Dia show up WYSIWYG in LyX). If you're a tech writer, I think you'll find LyX+Dia a much, much better solution than anything else.
[ Now only if they'd get the LyX codebase over to GTK+ as planned instead of continuing crappy XForms! And yes, I know about KLyX, but it is so out of date with the XForms codebase that it's not nearly as good. ]

-- Bryan "TheBS" Smith

Re:Technology versus politics by Skeezix · 2000-09-01 05:49 · Score: 2 · on KDE's Official Position on the GNOME Foundation

KDE tried CORBA. It was bloated and slow. Kind of like GNOME itself. You really should work in marketing though: "Everyone else (for whom I can name absolutely zero examples) is invested in CORBA, so KDE needs to be using that just for the buzzword too!"

I'll agree that we don't need to add more buzzword-technology to our environment for the sake of having our press releases be full of buzzwords. However, your statement about CORBA being bloated and slow is misinformed. ORBit is an extraordinarily lightweight, speedy implementation. Bud Tribble addressed this in his recent interview at lwn.net.

For more information about ORBit, you can also visit the ORBit page at RHAD.

In addition, check out the CORBA for Beginners page at OMG.
----

Objectivists to the Rescue by Threnody · 2000-08-29 23:54 · Score: 3 · on Judge OKs Class-Action Suit Against Microsoft

Check out MoralDefense.com for some excellent Objectivist rhetoric.

I run Linux at home. And my personal boycott against MSFT products has been active since Windows 95. There's no reason to reiterate how much MSFT sucks to the /. community.

But, I also feel that a boycott should be the extent of my ability to limit Microsoft's power. Only the individual can lash out against a corporation: by not buying a product. The government has no place in this matter.

If you don't like Windows, be a geek, go to Fry's, and build your own friggin' computer so that Bill never gets his greasy hands on your prized possession. What's the issue?

Don't invite the government to save "the public" on this one. If you bought a MSFT product, you only hurt yourself. I hardly think that "the public" needs protection from MSFT.

Even worse with the case of MSFT is that they've actually provided a decent product to fill a market niche (albeit an incredibly large niche). MSFT has been offering a superior consumer product for years at an excellent price. Windows has brought law and order to the consumer computer market and helped to make computers useful for grandma smith and uncle bob. Windows is an excellent product in that regard.

Even worse, it's obvious that MSFT has had competition through the entire battle. As I recall, AAPL's headquarters are smack-dab in the middle of Silicon Valley; and SUNW's headquarters aren't far down the road. And SGI's and even the now defunct SCO (Tarantella?). There were plenty of choices out there if you really wanted an alternate. But, again: MSFT was providing a product that better suited people's needs at a much better price. Even today one can argue that Windows ME/2000 provides most people with more functionality than they'll ever need.

If you want to destroy Microsoft, don't waste your time with the government. Hack Eazel, GNOME, KDE; or some other Linux component that threatens the power or Redmond.

Re:Author is missing the point... by Skeezix · 2000-08-25 23:38 · Score: 3 · on GNOME Foundation, UI And Linux

For the sake of completion, here are a few links that may be of interest:

The Gnome User Interface Improvement Project

Gnome Programming Guidelines
----

Re:Author is missing the point... by Skeezix · 2000-08-25 23:38 · Score: 3 · on GNOME Foundation, UI And Linux

For the sake of completion, here are a few links that may be of interest:

The Gnome User Interface Improvement Project

Gnome Programming Guidelines
----

Notes from a GNOME coder by Hans+Petter+Jansson · 2000-08-24 03:24 · Score: 2 · on KDE Strikes Back

First a disclaimer: I program for GNOME and am a Helix Code employee. I understand that this newsitem is more about the new KDE beta than the KDE-GNOME relationship, yet I have to address some of the concerns regarding a "war" between these two projects (as voiced in many comments here).

The article linked to on the front page was obnoxious, and I feel personally attacked, not for my code's merits, but just on "general principle", because I happen to code for GNOME. I, as many other developers want to be left alone by such rabble-rousers. I just want to do my thing.

I've never attacked anyone on the basis of doing the KDE project - on the other hand, we're all making good progress, and I believe that one borrows ideas from the other on a regular basis. The "inefficiency" of having two projects with such overlap is blown out of proportions by many comments here. They merely represent two different approaches to a problem, with two different solution sets. No one side has all the best solutions.

Here are links to the publicity/news pages on both sides of the camp, so you can compare the badmouthing-article counts:

KDE news, GNOME news.

They speak for themselves. Thanks for your attention and stuff.

Re:Helix wants to own Gnome by Trojan · 2000-08-23 22:42 · Score: 1 · on KDE Strikes Back

Currently I can only find this. It used to hold for Helix's setup tools too, but apparently that has been already been changed after protests. If I haven't missed other projects, I guess things are not as bad as I initially thought.

Let's hope it stays this way. For one thing, requiring copyright donation would most probably keep other companies from contributing. And individual contributors who code in their spare time might be lured into things they don't really stand behind.

Re:Helix wants to own Gnome by Trojan · 2000-08-23 22:29 · Score: 1 · on KDE Strikes Back

Really? Take a look at gb.
Ok, I seem to be unable to find other examples (besides libart but Helix is not involved in that). So not as bad as I thought it was. But still I think it's a danger to free software if these twisted licences would become common place.

Mixing (L)GPL and non GPL compatible code by Carl · 2000-08-23 17:10 · Score: 3 · on IBM Releases SashXB

As someone on Gnotices noted http://news.gnome.org/gnome-news/96696453 2/ SashXB is under the LGPL, but it uses Mozilla and Xerces which are under the NPL/MPL and the Apache license. These licenses are not GPL compatible!

This might not be a direct problem for SashXB since it is under the LGPL but it might be a problem for pure GPL programs in GNOME that want to use parts of the libraries that it depends on.

Should GNOME really include parts that are not GPL compatible?

Re:gnome vs helix gnome by Skeezix · 2000-08-22 22:25 · Score: 4 · on Helix Code Profiled in Boston Globe

Helix Gnome is a Gnome distribution. It's analogous to the concept of Linux distributions, where vendors customize the kernel, integrate everything, do bug fixes, decide what packages they wish to include, and make it easy to install and use. That's what Helix Code is doing for Gnome. They've written utilities like the installer and updater to facilitate the installation/upgrading process. They've decided which packages they wish to include in their distribution of the Gnome Environment. And they're doing application development. They have some of the best Gnome hackers around working for them, writing Evolution (the Fifth Preview Release is out now, btw!), the Helix Setup Tools, and improving the desktop and development environment in general.
----

Re:gnome vs helix gnome by supine · 2000-08-22 22:21 · Score: 3 · on Helix Code Profiled in Boston Globe

gnome is a desktop, with underlying infrastructure of libraries and gui tool kit, plus some applications based on said libraries and tool kit (gnucash, gnumeric, gedit etc. etc.), it has been around a while now (refer www.gnome.org)

helixcode, which hasn't been around so long, is a distribution of gnome (much like redhat is a distro of gnu/linux) so it bundles up the desktop, libraries, tool kit, apps etc. etc. checks for dependencies and then offers you a nice gui based update mechanism to make your life *so* much easier... (refer www.helixcode.com)

tell me, when was the last time you checked what updates were available for your distro / desktop ??

HTH
marty

Re:AAAGGHGHGHGHHH by Emil+Brink · 2000-08-21 21:57 · Score: 1 · on Kmeleon - Windows Gecko Browser

I think it's a shame that neither the Slashdot editor (Hemos) or you made Galeon a link, since perhaps someone wants to know more (without going through the nowadays horrible image-mapped h*ll that is gnome.org). There. ;^)

Re:Hmm.. by Rob+Kaper · 2000-08-17 21:52 · Score: 1 · on KDE Developer on the GNOME Foundation

Superior eye candy.

This is very personal, so I can advice /. readers to check both the See GNOME in Action KDE2 Screenshots screenshot pages.

Warm GPL fuzzies.

Again very personal and hardly of any concern for _real_ end users. Real end users do not have a strong opinion on the GPL or QPL.

Neato software.

You can run either programs in either environment, and let me assure you that some KDE programs are neater than GNOME's. Try KDE2 and see how well Konqueror is doing. Or try Konsole in fullscreen mode. ;-)

KDE tries too hard to look like Windows.

Yes and no. Face it, the GUI of Microsoft isn't all bad. It's one of the best parts of Windows. Therefore KDE has taken many good aspects from it. And many aspects from CDE, BeOS, MacOS, etc. Check the screenshots again, I can assure you KDE does not have to look like Windows at all.

Some Thoughts by msaavedra · 2000-08-16 16:08 · Score: 2 · on Eazel's Nautilus Preview 1 Released

I just downloaded the preview release, and Nautilus seems to be pretty slick. Eazel and the other contributors have done a lot of work in a pretty short amount of time. It even seems to be fairly stable for such an early release, though it did crash after about fifteen minutes. That said, I can't really see this replacing either emelFM or the console, which are my primary file managers.

Sure, Nautilus looks really professional, and has plenty of eye- and ear-candy, but when considering functionality, how does Nautilus really benefit the user? For example, how is being able to play an mp3 right in the file manager using a bonobo component any better than just having xmms pop-up to play it? Other than just being a cool technological feat, I can't see how a component architecture is really advantageous in a file manager.

Another concern I have is speed. This release is dog-slow on my Athlon system with 160 MB of RAM. I know its not fair to reach conclusions about the finished product based on such an early release, but can we realistically expect this app to ever be blazingly fast? I'm curious about how long I will have to sit and wait while Nautilus draws the contents of a directory with a few hundred or even a few thousand files, especially with all of the content preview functionality enabled.

I guess what I want is something where I can turn off all of the extraneous stuff made to help newbies and still have a file manager with ground-breaking (dare I say innovative) features for helping me do what file managers are meant to do: manage files. With the pervasive networking, high bandwidth and gigantic hard drives that are becoming commonplace today, it's getting progressively harder to sort through the data that is available on my computer. The file manager paradigms we have now were designed for a much smaller amount of data (on both the local system and over the network). Even my $HOME directory is starting to become a tangled maze of information that is taking more and more time for me to try and keep organized. And this is on a system with a relatively sane *nix style file system structure. I shudder even to think about some large windows drives that I've seen.

Anyway, a while back on Gnotices , in another discussion on Nautilus, I brought up my thoughts on this subject, and mentioned that I thought having a filtering and querying mechanism somewhat like SQL (of course with a good GUI) would be great to help sort through large amounts of files. Someone said that there were at least tentative plans to include something like this in Nautilus eventually. I hope this comes to pass. Also, someone else said that the Linux file system was not well suited to doing this sort of database-like operation. Perhaps there are some gurus out there who can elaborate on this.

I've rambled enough here, so I'd like to end by pointing out that I don't mean this to sound too harsh towards Nautilus. I've been using GNOME off and on since the .30 days, and I sincerely hope that Nautilus will be a worthwhile addition to the desktop. I feel, though, that without some serious consideration of the issues I wrote about above, Nautilus will just be a fancy version of Windows Explorer, when it could be something much better. Perhaps other /. readers have better ideas than my own, and we can discuss them here...

---------------------------
"The people. Could you patent the sun?"

Re:Windows CE is better by Russ+Nelson · 2000-08-09 01:51 · Score: 2 · on More On The Compaq iPAQ Linux Handheld

X works fine on a handheld. X applications might not work so very well. That's why some people are working on Gnome on a PDA. It was on slashdot a few weeks ago. If I were a moderator, I'd mark your post down as *redundant*.
-russ

"Hands Off X" by SEWilco · 2000-08-09 01:36 · Score: 2 · on More On The Compaq iPAQ Linux Handheld

The "Hands Off X!" which is mentioned apparently was a talk about how Scheifler had helper programs interface to X. I think the software is used in Xtalk and a2x

Re:Get rid of... by Kiro · 2000-08-08 23:19 · Score: 1 · on Let's Make UNIX Not Suck

Although I must admit Gnome 1.0 was a bad release in term of code quality and speed, it has come a long way since.

For those interested gnome is at: http://www.gnome.org/start

My specs: P300 128 RAM Voodoo3

At the moment I have both Gnome 1.2.1 and Kde 1.92 and I must say there is no difference in speed between the two. 1.2 has added several eye-candy features (read: good to atttract newbies) and just improved the functionnality of core apps, especially GMC.

Gnome is not bloatware anymore even for my middle-end box. Good job to their team

--
Kiro

Re:A useful admin tool I'd like to see.. by marcnucc · 2000-08-06 20:18 · Score: 1 · on HelixCode Releases Admin Tools

GConf is a project which is trying to do this.

Re:interface expert or not... by _SIGKILL_ · 2000-08-05 08:34 · Score: 1 · on New Nautilus Screenshots

As for COM, it is a gift from god. COM and DirectX are two technologies sorely missing from Linux. However, CORBA and COM are two entirely different beasts. Wheras COM is a (relativly) simple API, CORBA is quite a beast. Look at the two APIs.

The GNOME team is working to develop Bonobo to address the problems of Corba. From what I have read, the interface is very similar to COM (I haven't used COM before). It essentially just acts as a wrapper for CORBA.

As for using CORBA in the Gnome environment, the GNOME team has developed Gnorba, a wrapper for Corba. Gnorba simplifies things by using GOAD to launch servers. From what I understand, the GNOME team is encouraging people to develop with Bonobo instead of Gnorba.

Now that the components are there, people just need to develop applications to take advantage of them.

Re:What IS Eazel Nautilus? A File Manager replacer by Skeezix · 2000-08-05 02:17 · Score: 4 · on New Nautilus Screenshots

The short answer is that Nautilus is Eazel's open source replacement for the current Gnome file manager, gmc. As the Gnome hackers discovered once they were deep into the project, Midnight Commander wasn't the greatest of file managers to use as a starting point for a Gnome file manager. Also, as The Gnome Project has matured, we have new technologies to work with, such as Bonobo. Nautilus will use these new advances in the Gnome framework to provide a next generation file manager for the Gnome Project. Nautilus will not only allow you to manage your files, but also to view documents using embedded viewers. The next generation Gnome help system will use nautilus, for example. Once nautilus is released as part of the Gnome desktop, users will notice an incredible difference as it will play a very integral part, and should appeal to newbies and Unix experts alike.
----

Re:What IS Eazel Nautilus? A File Manager replacer by Skeezix · 2000-08-05 02:17 · Score: 4 · on New Nautilus Screenshots

The short answer is that Nautilus is Eazel's open source replacement for the current Gnome file manager, gmc. As the Gnome hackers discovered once they were deep into the project, Midnight Commander wasn't the greatest of file managers to use as a starting point for a Gnome file manager. Also, as The Gnome Project has matured, we have new technologies to work with, such as Bonobo. Nautilus will use these new advances in the Gnome framework to provide a next generation file manager for the Gnome Project. Nautilus will not only allow you to manage your files, but also to view documents using embedded viewers. The next generation Gnome help system will use nautilus, for example. Once nautilus is released as part of the Gnome desktop, users will notice an incredible difference as it will play a very integral part, and should appeal to newbies and Unix experts alike.
----

Re:GNOME is being moved to handhelds already by KenCrandall · 2000-08-02 05:38 · Score: 1 · on Jim Gettys On Itsy/GNOME/KDE And Small Devices

I'm eagerly awaiting a source release from Henzai...

I can't wait to see how small they've gotten the GNOME-based framework.

Ken

Re:Evolution by Skeezix · 2000-07-27 23:27 · Score: 1 · on Evolution 0.3 Released

Yes but their current source base is so big now that it's quite intimidating to just join in. And GNOME developers don't produce mucho documentation at all.

What sort of documentation are you looking for. Perhaps I can help you find it. The Gnome Project has plenty of documentation. Also, if you're interested in developing for Gnome, check out The Gnome Developer's Site. In addition, resources such as mailing lists, newsgroups, national websites, and related projects can be found on Gnome's Resource Index. I hope this helps.
----