Slashdot Mirror
An Interview with Jeff Waugh
An anonymous reader writes "LinuxWorld has published a nice interview with Jeff Waugh, one of the core members of the GNOME community. In the interview Waugh talks about the upcoming GNOME 2.6, his views on software patents and on the involvement of the big vendors in the GNOME development process. Waugh is the current chair of the GNOME release team."
"Well well well, what is he good for?" [Only the aussies here will get this. Nothing on *this* (Jeff) Waugh)]
What a sad state of affairs that this is one of the main topics that the GPL community has to discuss.
More than the progress of the GNU project, more than software engineering breakthroughs, more than new ideas in user interface design, software patents seems to have eclipsed all that.
I used to be excited about computers and sharing ideas, but when the community dedicated to sharing has become a one note wonder, I find myself dulled by such harping on technicalities rather than technologies.
I have been pwned because my
What is the roadmap for convergence of Gnome and KDE? It is good to have choice, but sad to see a fragmentation at the application level. Apart from the different programming languages used in the two, is there any fundamental reason why a common API cannot be defined or added?
Right now it seems that the only solution for applications that want to be totally portable is to bypass KDE and Gnome entirely and use their own libraries (Mozilla, OOorg) and/or X.
Even being able to run Gnome and KDE side-by-side in the same sessions would be a good thing.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
Wasn't it supposed to be released on the 2nd?
http://gtk.org/plan/2.4/
New file selector, yum.
After a few lackluster attempts at installing Gnome on my OSX box I have to say that a nice easy step by step instruction would be most helpful.
For many users, all the untarring, compiling and whatnot is a major headache -- akin to grasping the concept of depth of field in photography for me. Once I finally got it, it was super easy, but getting it in the first place was a big struggle.
I guess there's something about the whole process that I either just don't get, or maybe I think it's a lot harder than it really is.
So anyone know an easy way to get Gnome on an OSX box?
Way too corporate ... I think Linus's approach is better, just avoid reading patents as much as you can and start caring when someone sues.
I have always used GNOME, so I am excited that a newer version will be released. I am a little behind, I am still using the GNOME version that came with Red Hat 7.1 :(
In terms of the technology, we've basically got all of the desktop applications solved.
In terms of the mental ward, we've basically got all of the penthouse suites booked....by YOU! HAHAHAHA
Honestly, GNOME is the best desktop excluding OSX in terms of usability (imho omg wtf) - but give me break, Jake! I guess if by 'solved' you really mean "looks kind of like something you've seen in either Windows or Mac, but not really", then I agree whole-heartedly.
They seem to have loads of smart people working on Gnome these days. So how do they explain something like Epiphany? And why is gtk-2.0 so slow (compared to the first gtk certainly)?
Here is the unification roadmap:
KDE: ----------X
GNOME: ------------------->
</biased_gnome_user>
But, seriously, it doesnt make sense to talk about unifying them, as they are built around fundamentally different toolkits. ( Qt uses a modified subset of C++, GTK+ uses C as a base but has a nice C++ wrapper)
So they cant really be unified, though they can be made quite compatible.
I'm personally biased towards GNOME, because as a C++ programmer I love the stl, and thus hate Qt and the moc. But that doesnt mean I really think that KDE will die off: Free code is, after all, immortal.
In terms of the technology, we've basically got all of the desktop applications solved. Between OpenOffice.org, GNOME, Mozilla and a number of other projects, the stack of stuff people generally use on the desktop is pretty much there.
:)
Which really makes me wish that GNUCash was in that group. I do everything (word processing, email, spreadsheets, gaming) on Linux inside Gnome except for managing my finances. I keep a windows box with Quicken around for that. GNUCash could replace that for me but probably not before GNUCash-2 which is supposed to be GTK2. I heard they were short on developers and that was stalling progress on that. I guess personal finance doesn't have much of a place on a business desktop and gets less attention. I've been playing around with SQL-Ledger but thats a bit overkill for my needs.
That aside I love Gnome and am looking forward to 2.6 and Epiphany 1.2.
KDE 3.2 is noticably faster than GNOME 2.whatever. KDE is also more like windows than gnome (which is more like motif). You might want to look at Lindows, which uses KDE for the GUI. HTH.
I don't understand how people keep saying that KDE and Gnome don't work together. They're different environments, but all they're parts are pretty darn interchangeable. A while ago, for the heck of it, I replaced gnome-panel in Session prefs with kicker. Worked perfectly. After reading your post, I called kwin --replace to switch from metacity to kde's wm.
... that's for running across OS's, not KDE/Gnome. Besides, Native Widget Framework is due for the next major release AFAIK.
... it uses gtk+ or gtk2, many of which would consider to be (sort of) Gnome. XUL is not a KDE/Gnome issue. Like OO.o, it's another platform issue.
And OO.org
Mozilla
Gnome and KDE don't need to converge. At this point, they're aiming at different markets. KDE is uber-customizable. Gnome is focusing on KISS usability issues. The important backend stuff is already being taken care of via freedesktop.org.
Once we've reached a point where the projects are not duplicating effort needlessly, we can truly say vive la difference with no guilt over wasted efforts.
I'm using Gnome 2.5 (Subscribed to the 2.5 channel in Red Carpet, automagically upgraded everything for me). I have to say that Nautilus in the 2.5/2.6 branch is amazing.
How amazing, you ask? It's as fast as gmc used to be. Although it is a little strange to switch back to the old OS9 style Spatial Finder style of file management.
Things are a little buggy, Nautilus crashes every once in a while, and Evolution sometimes doesn't quit correctly. But in general, the whole desktop is great. Gimp1.3 is super sweet, and finally supports re-editable Text layers (ala photoshop)
By software engineering breakthroughs do you mean "ideas stolen from Windows NT/2000?"
I've recently been introducing my staff at my day job to GNOME since we are moving away from OpenVMS to Unix. Since HP-UX will be coming with GNOME as a default in future releases, I figured it would be good to get the guys used to it by having them use it on a daily basis for basic work stuff. So far they have taken to it pretty well. The most amazing thing is that some of them actually find it EASIER and more FLEXIBLE than Windows. Thank you for a terrific project!
I try to be fu
Waugh: The whole point of the patent system is that they're supposed to be obvious things. But there are a lot of things in computing that are unobvious to a point
Umm, isn't it the opposite? Only those insights and ideas which are "non-obvious".
Why do you think Linus Torvalds is so popular? He's so down-to-earth about these things and interested in the technology and not the technicalities. This SCO mess forced him into it, but even then he still spits out the choice quotes, like the infamous "crack" comment.
Ah, yes. Download, decompress, untar, compile, discover missing package, download, decompress, untar, compile, discover missing package...
Keep It Simple Stupid? More like keep it Stupid Stupid?
kde and gnome
two answers to a problem
thats one too many
poor linux user
just wants his applications
to run on his box
choice is a good thing
and, and, and but not or, or.
Unification!
Ever tried pydance or StepMania? Or do you just not have the rhythm?
this wasn't flamebait (no one is gonna bother flaming the first part of his post lmao), however, it may have been a bit redundant as this question comes up EVERY TIME an article like this rolls around...now i'm not karma whoring here, BUT there is only one answer:
USE BOTH... Whichever one you like better (and you will, its never a toss up!) use!
replacing it with NEW Folger's Crystals! (lets see if they notice the difference)
Several people posted small amounts of the source in the original Slashdot story. Nothing's happened to the comments yet. Though, Microsoft has requested removal of Slashdot posts before, so who knows?
KDE is also more like windows than gnome (which is more like motif).
Gnome is nothing like motif.. ugh motif is horrible. I'd say that KDE is like Windows 2000 (not like XP), and Gnome is like OS X.
KDE is whatever you want it to be. I've got mine set up like OS X --- menubar at top, panel at bottom, toolbars and menus simplified. Out of box, its pretty Windows-y, but I'd wager most KDE users don't use the desktop the way it comes out of box.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I've got mine set up like OS X
And yet it works nothing like OS X, and pales in comparison to it.
Cool!
It's easy to grasp the concept of depth of field. But it's not very intuitive, or straightforward. Much less understanding to use it to you benefit.
A simple way to make people understand what's the point with depth of field, or why it's used, was shown to me with an example:
A near object (a mupet) and a large (skycrapper) very far object where shot with 2 cameras. One had a very powefull zoom lens, and the other had a comon lens. The important thing was that the mupet was about the same size in both picture, that was the point. The skycrapper, on the other hand, appeared like a tall big item that didn't even fit the frame. On the other picture, the skycrapper looked like a tiny pencil that wasn't even as tall as the mupet.
unfinished: (adj.)
It depends on where your priorities are. Yeah, OS X is more polished and more pretty, but KDE is a whole lot more flexible and powerful.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
Or was it the other way around? :-( Damn...yes it was! Damnit.
unfinished: (adj.)
Gnome seems nice enough, but I refuse to use it until it is GPL:d.
Hmm, maybe I never did figure out depth of field after all :-)
gwhy gmust gall gnome gapp gnames gstart gwith g? git's gridiculous!
Does anyone know about the legal status of Mono? I mean, if Gnome starts using it all over the place and M$ decides to shut it down (they have like a million lawyers, so they can probably do that), won't Gnome be, well, dead? Or at least in a very uncomfortable position?
From http://www.gnome.org/start/: "Even-numbered releases are considered stable as both a user desktop and a development platform for third party software and ISVs. Odd-numbered releases are considered unstable, and are oriented toward testing and development of the desktop platform itself."
My only speed issue with GNOME is that it takes one or two seconds to make the main menu pop up from the toolbar. I am a happy and grateful GNOME user :)
I is very intresting that he mentiones software patents as a big issue. But I believe it is more a European debate while the United States got used to it. I Don't like software patents, they are bad for development and business. But something has to be done in US as well. Does anybody know the name of US activists that may change the USPTO policy?
What ? They are still allowing that guy to be part of that project ?
Yeah, like the guy's mind. He has no idea what he's talking about.
Yeah sad but true. I can't understand how such a person can make it into the board again. But people have stopped voting for some particular reasons.
Install both and try each -- it's free. All the major distros support both. It's kind of like asking someone which web browser to use or whether a song is a "good song" or not. You aren't going to get anywhere.
May we never see th
Something magical is upcoming. I've tried to find anything about Evolution Dataserver version 2.0 mentioned in interview, and all I found so far were references to cvs. Looks like apart few developers accessing thisnew wombat no one else knows what it is, how it is designed and how it works.
Less is more !
Can you support any of that with facts? Examples from IRC, or the GNOME mailing lists? I seriously doubt it.
As a guy who sold all of my Macs (had 4 and 1 powerbook (part of my job was Mac support), now I only have one G3 running yellowdog), I can say I'm happy.
And don't think that I haven't tried to use OSX. Common, I'm a sysadmin administering few companies and about 50 servers, I'm not unemployed, I don't have time to tweak my box to be usable for my work. Installing X11, installing Fink, compiling, searching for missing libraries, compiling, searching...
The common fact that Linux works nothing like OSX is main reason that I use it.
And believe me, Gnome is nothing like OSX. Main problem of OSX is when people like me start to use it. I always have 3x19" or 3x22" monitors, just to fit my windows. And just think about it, menu bar is on one monitor only, what a distance traveller this OSX mouse is (at least in my case). Also there is no support for separated screens, on Linux I just set Xinerama off and voila! Every monitor it's main menu and main panels with separated Window task list and it's own virtual screens.
Basically, my setup it's just as it would be as if I would use three different computers, but with one keyboard, one mouse and one storage.
But then again some people seem happy with OSX.
Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
The emphasis still seems to be on adding yet *more* features
and bloat to GNOME. At what point are they going to stop doing
this and finally declare the desktop *feature* complete?
IMHO, GNOME is eminently useable and has sufficent features already.
Stability should be given greater emphasis.
siggy played guitar
Sorry but this guy is everything else than a KEY factor in GNOME.
He is the release manager, like it or not. Cry me a river.
Yeah like releasing a bunch of Tarballs is such a painful job.
KDE Ktook kthe kletter k kalready
..........FULL STOP.
Having used libsigc++, it allows all the flexibility of Qt's string based callback system and is typesafe in addition.
Admittedly, it is all compile-time, but that doesnt mean its not dynamic: you can certainly hook and unhook things at runtime. The MOC isnt going to make C++ into an interpreted language or anything.
The other things about gtkmm that I like are that it doesnt try to duplicate things from the stl (such as QtString), that the code size tends to be small, and the executables tend to be fast.
I agree however, that if you liked Objective-C, that you will probably like Qt better, it makes sense.
Yeah like releasing a bunch of Tarballs is such a painful job.
If you think so, offer to help him. You'll be surprised to find how exhausting it can be.
Helping a Jeff Waugh ? Impossible, he even rejected help from people with g.o's Mainpage. He got so mad when others wanted to help him that he started calling them idiots. Reference
Do you think he shouts this out in the public so everyone can blame him in return ? You can be sure this is only happening in a per person way of doing this or in the IRC channel where you can follow his ranting and flaming of people. But you can be sure that those who are affected by all this carry the word around from one person to another.
Both are good. I can't decide between which.
I was a KDE 1.x user, a GNOME 1.2-1.4 user, a KDE 3.0 user, and a GNOME 2.2-2.4 user.
Right now, I'm using KDE 3.2. It's very fast compared to GNOME 2.4. Your mileage may vary (tm)
Yep, a lot of foundation code is migratable. Oh wait, let me correct that, a lot of foundataion code is common between the two. Both systems for instance require libxml. More work is being done where it makes sense. However sometimes there are two different ways of doing something, both with good and bad points. Then one group goes one way and one the other. Sometimes it turns out after comparing what happens (sometimes after many years) when going different ways that one way is considered better. (Kde is considering replacing aRts for instance)
I've worked in the KDE source code, most of kdelibs is kparts, kio, or qt/kde interface. None of that can be factored out unless Gnome is willing to use those, which is unlikely. I'm not sure what is the base of GNOME, but I'm sure they are in the same situation, a lot of code with an interface that KDE has no interest in useing at this time, so why try to make it common. Any code that proves itself in the real world will be factored out into something both use, but only if and when it makes sense.
The KDE/GNOME split happened for political reasons, most developers have no problem working with others. However supporters of one project or the other tend to be religious about it, and they have no room for anything the other religion does.
'And the good thing about our releases is that you only have to wait a maximum of six months to get something in.'
Wow, that's really efficient.
KDE is whatever you want it to be. I've got mine set up like OS X --- menubar at top, panel at bottom, toolbars and menus simplified. Out of box, its pretty Windows-y, but I'd wager most KDE users don't use the desktop the way it comes out of box.
No wonder I felt KDE was repulsive the minute I tried it. I don't want my desktop to look and feel like bloody Windoze dammit! GNOME forever!