Slashdot Mirror


Proposal For Gnome To Become Linux-Only

Moderator writes "Could Gnome drop support for non-Linux operating systems? That was a recent proposal on the Gnome mailing list, although there were significant objections in response. Quoting: 'It is harmful to pretend that you are writing the OS core to work on any number of different kernels...the time has come for GNOME to embrace Linux a bit more boldly.'"

19 of 292 comments (clear)

  1. I support this! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I support this because it can only help to make Gnome more irrelevant.

    1. Re:I support this! by Aighearach · · Score: 4, Informative

      Gnome isn't the controlling factor for Gtk+, and that support would never have OS lock. We're only talking about "Gnome" here, not Gimp or the Gimp ToolKit (Gtk). Gnome is just another user of the widget set that happens to share a first letter.

      We're actually not even talking about most of Gnome. Just Gnome Shell.

  2. Dumb Idea by Perl-Pusher · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since developers from other OS's have contributed to Gnome. KDE would then be the only recourse for them. I think gnome would quickly lose support based on the ill will that would generate alone.

    1. Re:Dumb Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a dumb idea for software architecture reasons, too. I'll explain.

      When writing a Windows application, you must recognize that the interface between your application and TODAY'S version of Windows must remain fluid such that you can support changes delivered by patch or by OS release. This is known formally as "decoupling" and it is necessary to isolate big systems that need to communicate. Decoupling is important for unix applications as well, because kernels change over time and APIs vary slightly between unixes.

      If you truly believe your application gains anything by eliminating a decoupling library/layer, you have missed the point of the past few DECADES of object-oriented programming.

    2. Re:Dumb Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      KDE on the next release is looking to be the same. Hello? release it as early beta and do NOT call it a release until all the tools that are used to make it useful to noobs are ported to the changes.

      Instead we get a mature interface that is abandonded and will not support it anymore because they all moved to the new shiny.

      The "mature interface" was quite frankly the result of years of hacks, that were somehow superglued together.
      The most basic change sometimes involved rewriting major subsystems, and tons of projects ended up being abandoned because they were practically impossible to incorporate into KDE 3.5.

      The real problem with KDE 4 though, was distros making it default AGAINST THE WISHES OF KDE DEVELOPERS.
      KDE Developers has specifically stated that distros looking for stability and feature-parity should wait until later KDE 4.X releases, but distros wanting to be "cutting-edge" forced it on users.
      KDE 4.0 was intended as a call to developers to port their applications over with a promise of relative stability in the KDE libraries from that point, and a call for theme developers and the like to do the same, and a chance for the morbidly curious or advanced users to get used to the new system, it was never intended to be "finished".
      I won't say I agree with their decision to bump the version number, but it was already delayed and they decided that to not put it off further would speed up the porting of applications and the finishing of the DE, and they were very clear about what the release was and wasn't.

    3. Re:Dumb Idea by Jonner · · Score: 3, Interesting

      KDE is far from the only recourse, as there are a number of other Desktop Environments already in common use, including XFCE and Unity/GNOME 2. However, GNOME requiring systemd would be a giant mistake as it would be a kick in the face not only for non-Linux based OSes, but for any Linux-based distro that use a different init. I haven't followed the Canonical /GNOME controversies much, but this inclines me to think Canonical isn't being as unreasonable as some think to diverge from GNOME. Optional systemd integration is probably a good idea.

  3. So what? by airfoobar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's open source. If there are people who want it on other platforms, they can just fork it. Right?

  4. WTF? by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Gnome is supposed to be written to support X Windows.

    I currently use gnome on my Linux and FreeBSD platforms, and have for quite some years. Now they're looking to tell the rest of us to PFO because they've tied themselves too tightly to Linux ... why is it even tied to the kernel anyway?

    The end result will be that I and others won't use Gnome at all (not even on my Linux installs) ... but, hey, if your "be all you can be" plan is all about working on only one system, that's fine. Just don't be surprised when the number of people who use it drops off.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:WTF? by FooBarWidget · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The days that desktop environments are only GUIs and only consisted of a bunch of windows that paint stuff on the screen are long over. These days desktop environment handle a lot more lower-level stuff, and users rightfully expect them to do so. Think for example user interfaces for managing hardware, system settings (user accounts, security, firewall, wired and wireless network), etc. GNOME depends on various background daemons that must be started at boot. All of these things have system-dependent mechanisms. Configuring the wireless network is completely different between FreeBSD, Solaris and Linux. All 3 of those OSes have a completely different init system, completely different firewall system, etc.

    2. Re:WTF? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 3, Informative

      Because it's claimed that systemd will provide "better user experience" as espoused here. I don't really buy most of the arguments like since many them don't seem to be things that should require a dependency on an init system to fix.

  5. How the community wants to do things by DarkOx · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Outside a few egomaniacs with a one distro to bind them all mentality, this is not how things have been done up till now. I don't think the larger community wants to change either.

    FreeDesktop.org has turned out some nice software but I don't like what they doing. Its one thing to suggest some high-level standards and try to create some consistency among projects that are already tied to a set of core libraries, its another to have to assume your specific daemon systemd or whatever is running. There is no reason to require something like that when it would be simple enough to abstract things in away that highlevel stuff like a gtk dialog can start an stop services in whatever way a particular distro wants to set things up.

    Taking Gnome entirely Linux specific is the same deal, it means you have to accept a whole heap of stuff and conventions or you can't use it all. Thats dumb, ultimately its going to make distributions more varied not less. As a few core decisions will determine the entire software stack.

    Over the short term it will enable people to polish up somethings and make them work real nice, as time marches on though its going to mean that something written for a Debian based distro wont be portable at all to something based on REHL or Slackware, or any of the BSDs. We will all end up with few software choices not more.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  6. Re:Abandoned by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 4, Informative

    Or maybe I'm talking out of my butt, and it IS about the shell. Should RTFA.

  7. Re:Can you get Gnome to replace X? by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Sending vector images, common commands to the X Server to display the images worked wonderfully in a world of simple graphics and low bandwith. Today it is becoming extra overhead. " says the man who does not manage a large deployment...

    Sorry but MOST linux enterprise installs used X heavily. it's call thin clients and the biggest selling point to get Linux in the door.

    $250.00 per user cost with no per seat costs and a reduction of IT staff by 50% is HARD to ignore..... X is what delivers that ability.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  8. Re:Lets look at it by fusiongyro · · Score: 4, Informative

    I think you're missing out on PC-BSD, which is a more desktop-oriented FreeBSD. There's also DragonflyBSD which was developed to improve SMP support, again largely for desktop performance.

    If you'd run CDE, you'd be in a better place to appreciate GNOME's usability on Solaris. I don't see what this has to do with thin clients either.

    Gtk support on OS X has traditionally been kind of iffy. I haven't had luck running Haskell + Gtk on OS X. I am not aware of any apps that use it. It doesn't help that Qt supports OS X natively.

    Ultimately, I think the question is whether or not the loss is worth the gain. I don't personally use GNOME but I also don't see the potential gain here as being worth the loss of community. It's not a great idea to abandon any segment of your userbase, because the rest of your userbase will get skittish. Not something you need with a combination of high-profile competition (Unity) and consistently eroding support. I don't think this is likely to go through, but if it does, I'd say you can expect GNOME to be dead within two or three years.

  9. The proposal is nothing of the sorts! by tvelocity · · Score: 5, Informative

    This "GNOME to drop non-Linux support" sensationalism on the net is ridiculous. There has been no such proposal! Yes, I RTFA and the full mailing list discussions.

    The proposal in GNOME's desktop-devel-list was by the author and maintainer of systemd to let GNOME adopt systemd as the mechanism to configure certain system-wide settings, like locale and timezone data. This would be implemented as a dbus interface which would spawn a mini-daemon via systemd when that was required. This would solve the age old problem of every distro having their own slight variation on how to configure these things.

    Notice the key part of the proposal: the dbus interface. This is the proposed dependency, and not the whole of systemd which, yes is Linux only, but in reality is just a reference implementation for this dbus interface which can be VERY easily reimplemented on any system (the minidaemons themselves are very trivial, porting systemd to other platforms however is not).

    What this proposal ACTUALLY means: (a) Non Linux platforms, or Linux distros not yet using systemd, would initially have grayed out certain configuration options in the control center, like locale for example. (b) These settings can be made available just by implementing a trivial dbus interface.

    Nothing of this dropping non-Linux OS support nonsense. Hope this clears up the nonsense somewhat

  10. Re:Abandoned by Filip22012005 · · Score: 3, Informative

    GNU's not Unix Image Manipulation Program Toolkit is the foundation fro the GNU's not Unix Network Object Model Environment. So getting that wrong isn't really your fault.

    --
    When the policeman of the tie, rule you violate, hello punishment of the kitty?
  11. What are these guys smoking? by Beelzebud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Gnome went from being the most usable, stable, "just works" DE for unix-like systems, to a steaming pile of crap, IMHO. I'm still in shock that they took a stable, functional foundation that was Gnome 2, and just literally threw it all away. I tried to give Gnome 3 a chance, but it's like a damned cell-phone UI.

  12. Re:Can you get Gnome to replace X? by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You are doing it wrong.
    1. If you are an adminstrator of any worth you can do it without X via command line.
    2. Almost all enterprise Applications that are fairly new are Web Based
    3. There are other just as affordable or more affordable remote access "thin client" solutions available.

    X11 is an aged and out of date protocol. It had its use, today it is a dinosaur. Just because you work on badly managed enterprise or aged model, it doesn't mean everyone else does.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  13. I offer a modest counterproposal by mysidia · · Score: 4, Funny

    As a BSD user; I strongly suggest that Gnome become BSD-only.

    KDE seems more appropriate to the part of the Linux market that wants the OS to be a Windows clone, anyways.