Slashdot Mirror
GNOME and KDE Devs Wrangle Over 'System Settings' Name
An anonymous reader writes "The developer of the KDE System Settings application has launched a formal complaint against GNOME for renaming 'Control Center' to 'System Settings' in GNOME 3.0. This developer is demanding that GNOME immediately change the name of their control panel area. Developers on both sides are now discussing this act."
Seems both KDE and Gnome are making themselves irrelevant. Switched to XFCE, not going back.
Is that the biggest issue we face? Are we turning in to commercial software companies now? Did he request it in the Eastern District of Texas?
two fat slobs fighting over the last greasy porkchop
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Are we going to have stories on every little juvenile temper tantrum? Just send them to their rooms until they're willing to work something out between them.
This is definitely something worth arguing about.
Nah, the little ones have learned their lesson well. They don't need a large company anymore
to have something stupid to argue about.
Hmm, if it is a "control panel" why not just call it that??? I'm surprised that KDE hasn't named theirs Kontrol Panel, then everyone would be confused!!!
I'm a satisfied KDE user, but this complaint is absolutely ridiculous. Does that mean each system component needs a name that's unique in the whole universe?
Quote from TFA: "He says that it will cause packaging problems if there cannot be two System Settings entries in a desktop menu, as such when running GNOME the KDE System Settings application may not appear listed".
If that's the case it's a bit ridiculous. Maybe it'd be good to add some kind of namespace system.
Anyway...this doesn't deserve to be on slashdot front page.
Actual quote:
"As KDE occupied this name first, it is ours as a result, and I will NOT be relinquishing it"
To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
Relax guys. It is a real problem that need to be solved. Image you have two command line app with the same name. What do you do? Your package manager wont let you have them both installed at once because they have a file conflict.
It's what happen here. KDE had it 3 years before Gnome. I think the complaint is valid. You can call two applications the same in Linux, it will just cause conflict. It's the way it work. Please don't replay saying "use prefix", it's an hack, not a solution.
And this is how it gets shown.
For better or worse, with Linux we got Torvalds to drop by and tell people to stop being stupid.
We really need to clean up our act and keep the multitude of choices, while we produce a reference starndard for the GUI (a la POSIX -- it could very well _be_ POSIX).
DEs, distros, etc. need to see bigger and understand that we are doomed if we're divided. We could have ousted M$ long ago (even with their dirty tricks). Our enemy is ourselves, M$ is just a pale excuse. But will we unite? No, we seemingly can't make it happen... maybe if we a more powerful enemy?
Well, I also think that naming conventions should be enforced strictly to avoid getting in the user's way. For instance, there's a "feature" of latin languages (such as Italian, my native language) that can lead to lots of problems if one doesn't stick to the appropriated name conventions: the word order in expressions such as "Foo options" or "Foo settings" is the opposite with respect to English. Therefore, when you want to configure a network card you never know if you have to search "Network" or "Options for Network" or "Settings for Network" or "Instruments for Network", which are alphabetically very far apart. In particular, I find that the old Windows XP's control panel is a hell to browse.
My first program:
Hell Segmentation fault
The developers probably don't see that as a problem; it's something like an "unpermitted use case", which is code for something they'd never do, hence nobody else should.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Are the requirements so different that the KDE and GNOME guys can't work together to establish a common framework that would work well for both of them, and free up some additional cycles, say for keeping virtuoso from filling up the disk with .xsession errors or making GNOME 3 more configurable?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Can somebody explain where exactly there is a conflict? Which namespaces are affected? dbus, /usr/bin/*, package names, .desktop files? "System Settings" as a name sounds perfectly fine and it makes perfect sense to name it that way for both environments, because it is a similar tool for the same job. Wouldn't the proper solution for this simply be to name the thing gsystem-setting and the other ksystem-settings and just label the menu entry "System Settings" depending on what DE you are currently running?
While the open source approach is great for creating server software and certain clients (eg Firefox, VLC, Transmission), the state of Linux on the desktop remains terrible. This bickering approach is a big factor why. Devs from KDE & Gnome should be working together on a unified system instead of wasting time and resources on separate projects. Shuttleworth has the right idea but Ubuntu is doomed because certain devs refuse to release new code to suit his release schedule.
What's really annoying is that Mac OS X will probably be deprecated in favour of iOS on the desktop. There is a golden opportunity for a comparable Linux distro but it will only happen when the devs agree to work together instead of fighting each other. So basically it will never happen.
I bet many of these devs also criticized Apple for suing over the "App Store" trademark. Yay hypocrisy.
If you can't convince them, convict them.
Why doesn't KDE just go with Kontrol Center and let Gnome use System Gsettings ?
Is one of the top 5 reasons why i can't ever take *nix or it's supporters that seriously.
FAR too much pedantic arguing over stupid shit.
And most of them are guilty of it.
I always considered it douchey of kde to name it "systemsettings" anyway. Should have been "kde-system-settings" or something. It sure as hell doesn't handle non-kde stuff properly. But two wrongs don't make a right, gnome.
Using XFCE right now, because KDE and GNOME have both gone retarded. But XFCE depends on gtk+, which is heavily under GNOME influence, and I can see the GNOME guys, spurred on by ubuntards, being vindictive enough to break stuff XFCE needs.
E17?
GNUstep/etoile would be nicest in some ways IMO.
As usual, Gnome developers assume that users will only run their DE and piss on any distro's attempt to easily integrate other DE's into their platform. Just look at the hostile tone of Gnome devs' messages and failure to address Ben Cooksley's concerns. Even when someone helpfully suggests a solution to the problem that Ben agrees to, they still piss on it. Other independent (read non-Redhat) Gnome devs should take notice on how bad a reputation Gnome is getting in the FOSS world because of these arrogant pricks.
The problem seems to be that duplicate names for different entries in menus on common distributions seem not be be correctly handled and the fix for this is not to go the consistent way (the same things are named in the same way) and fix the functions which create the menus (like detecting duplicate entries and attaching an indication of the package name in the entry), but to plainly forbid to name entries in the same way?
I dont like that. This is not the year of the linux desktop.
If you have two menu items with the same name, how do you decide which to choose? The short-term solution being proposed in the thread is to rename the "System Settings" of whatever desktop is not in use: call GNOME's app "GNOME System Settings" when in a KDE desktop.
Wrong word order. If you want to say "it is red", you don't say "is it red"
You don't in English, but you do in Welsh, Irish, Hawaiian, Tagalog, and written Arabic.
if you have an application named "System Settings" in both gnome and kde, you are going to have conflicts when both window managers are installed on the system. I'm not exactly certain how, but processes may confuse one for the other; it's just really bad practice to have two applications named the same anyhow. even if they *are* seperate distros.
Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
for any slashdot reader, this is just a pissing contest of two DE dev teams. In RL, this harms propagation of linux as a desktop. The best way would be to have it named Control Panel so the noobs feel OK. It is traumatising for windows user to move to linux desktop, same name convention should make it easier on those - and for them it matters the most. Very few people like changes. Having less to remember is better today, at least for the Average Joe that has no time nor will to remember trivial names for the same thing.
.Play.Open.Minded.
Problem solved.
Oh that's too Windows for us. How about System Control? It sounds like we're cool science fiction actors.
Just call it "System Settings", then GNOME ''surely'' can't use it!
Oh well, what the hell. A valid komplaint actually.
All this just because KDE wouldn't be able to call it Kontrol Kenter
Twinstiq, game news
...there is an actual issue with naming conflicts here. Of course, Phoronix can not write that in the title as that would create less page impressions and resemble actual news reporting.
Thanks to the "anonymous readers" who keep submitting Phoronix advertisements^Wstories and the mods letting them through with all their bullshit we can have yet another thread with misinformed people trolling the hell out of the submission box.
[...] it's just really bad practice to have two applications named the same anyhow. even if they *are* seperate distros.
If you read the original email, the concern is that those who have both KDE and GNOME installed on the same installation (of their Linux distribution). Therefore, there will be real people who will have two menu entries in their menus. Slashdot has succeeded, yet again, to hype up and bring unnecessary attention to an issue that isn't as drastic and fought over as the post makes it appear.
this thing should actually be named the same in ALL kinds of oses. and it shouldnt change from os to os, leave aside linux distro to linux distro.
Read radical news here
Name one Kystem Kettings and the other one gsystem gsettings. Problem solved.
There is no Linux namespace issue here. Linux inherits a hierarchical filesystem and strong conventions for environment variables such as PATH and LD_LIBRARY_PATH. If tens of thousands of complex applications can coexist under this discipline, session managers have no excuse for breakage.
It seems to be simply egregiously arrogant design for two session managers to insist on appropriating exactly the same part of this environment for themselves. That's like the C compiler insisting on using JAVA_HOME for some special purpose of its own.
Am I missing something fundamental here? Because I have found both Gnome and KDE to be a step backwards in terms of true ease of use and configurability compared to much simpler predecessors like twm. I can't even change the root cursor color. Pathetic.
Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
KDE should rename their Settings application to a unique string like: 'KDE Settings GnomeAreJerks' or 'Settings for KDE-is-better-than-GNOME'.
That solves the name conflict and underlying problems in one fell swoop.
Both sides need adult supervision, and should grow up.
I have Gnome 2, Unity, Xfce, and LXDE all on my home Linux workstation.
Due to having these 4 DEs on one box, my "Settings" menu is a bit cluttered. For example, the Gnome 2 settings options appear on my Xfce's Settings menu.
Why not just preface all their settings with their name? Such as "KDE System Settings", "Gnome System Settings", "Xfce System Settings", and so forth? That way it is more apparent which settings belongs to which DE, and as an added bonus if using alphabetical sort then each DE's menus and apps would be clustered together instead of intertwined with the others.
When you get to the phase where your new features all involve renaming things, rounding corners, or improving "user experience" then you know it's done and you should pick a new project to work on.
My wife spent some time in serious art-school mode. One of the profs that she greatly respected told her that making great art requires two people -- 1) the person capable of making the piece, and 2) someone else to shoot the first person when they're done. This is because most folks can't leave well enough alone and keep futzing until what was great (or at least on the cusp of it) is munged beyond the pale.
It does indeed look like at least some of the Linux DEs are at the "shoot the artist" stage.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Why is system settings tied to the desktop environment, anyway? That sort of thing should be desktop independent.
suck it up and deal with it
When seeking an alternative to System Settings, don't consider System Preferences, then you'll have Apple Legal after you!
http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-01-30/
It should be called Kontrol Kenter and Gontrol Genter, respectively.
(+1, Disagree)
Vee respectfully disagree. Vee say it should be Kaos Panel.
Let's stop the who-has-the-biggest-ta-tas argument and get back do doing something constructive, like, oh, coding?
Seriously, there has to be 5 different ways to get a library to do the same thing - which means, 5 different libraries for no good reason. Just how many libraries are needed for threading and portable runtimes?
Want to really end the lunacy? Get rid of the "not invented here" mentality in the desktop environments. Bloat is what is killing Microsoft. It's like watching them die a slow death from a combination of high blood pressure, diabetes, and being chronically obese. And for some unknown reason, we are hellbent for leather to emulate this dumbfuck ideology. There is no reason, none, for the multi-gigabyte desktops of today.
What to present a solution? (Yes, I have to do this, too many damn people saying "but but but you are not giving an answer, trollz trollz!!!1!!) Figure out some way to get a desktop environment that uses one, and only one, library for each time of specific domain that the library serves. Then re-use the living fuck out of it. We don't need a dozen HTML engines. We do need a GUI library that is consistent enough to get the job done, while not clogging our system's arteries.
Evilwm is lightest, but almost vertical learning-curve. Shortkeys for almost everything. :D
But once you've learn the shortkeys and tweaked it to you exact liking, you're hooked
http://www.6809.org.uk/evilwm/
Be careful it's a whopping 39k download. Yeah i know, everything is soo bloated these days.
Who would have thought that giving your application a wildly generic name might lead to other functionally similar applications using that same generic name?
There's nothing even remotely "formal" about the complain, Ben Cooksley is trying very hard to be an ass. Haven't those guys ever heard of something called "politeness"? It's amazing how easier it is to get people to cooperate once you go about it in the proper way.
the definition for the word "fratricide", but someone might already have done so in this column and I wouldn't want to get sued.
And put gnome in /usr/gnome and KDE in /usr/kde. Problem solved.
I've always hated the way files are so disorganised on *nix systems with everything just jumbled up in /usr and /var. It's really not that much to ask that programs are kept in one place, furthermore it would make package management nearly obsolete, because it would just be a matter of unpacking/deleting the directory for the program you want to install/uninstall.
Kids, work it out.
I'm using Linux Mint Debian that natively came with Gnome but I later installed KDE4 and I currently have two System Monitor, right next to each other in the menu. If I click one and then the other, the window of the second one will have the title System Monitor (2) - I'm using KDE right now, not sure how Gnome does it, if I was log into Gnome.
So it seems that it is possible for both items to have the same name at the same location in the menu.
But KDE4 and Gnome have slightly different menu structures, especially from Debian distros, so I'm not sure if the System Settings will be in the same spot like the System Monitors currently are.
Nobody cared
-denial
"System Settings" is a better name. This is obvious. The complaint is void.
A bag of rice fell over in China. Please put this up as a story!
This is really a non-issue.
Name your packages and shortcut links GNOME System Settings and KDE System Settings. Problem solved. Having a consistent experience when it comes to finding certain software isn't a bad thing.
I am not devoid of humor.
Calling the application kcontrol or gcontrol is ugly and immature. No wonder why KDE stopped doing that, a person who isn't technical savvy would generally be lost with that name.
A more elegant solution would be to have the system know when you are running either GNOME or KDE and then have the system only show the system settings application for the current desktop that you are running on but with a nice name like "System Settings". I'm sure this is possible and it shouldn't be so hard.
Ewebuntu (Debian is too hard) temporarily decided to rename a Gnome app which they do not develop to the same name as a KDE app which Ewebuntu do not either user of maintain (Kubuntu ain't Canonical).. Upstream decided for them. Like Phoronix has ever got things right.
Dear fanboi retards (default XFCE isn't light, just as default KDE or Gnome isn't either) and Microsoft shills - it's nothing to do with either Gnome (which I dislike) or KDE (which I do like), hence my use of "Ewebuntu".
I used to go to Slashdot to see what's new, then I came to see what happened last week, now I come only to see what didn't really happen....
--
There's only two industries who call their clients - users. There's only one group of industry clients that call themselves "users" (I couldn't think of any appropriate Bill Hicks quotes)
This leads to lots of duplication, it's better if the package manager handles everything.
The real problem is that people actually use KDE and GNOME rather than a competent DE/WM like FluxBox, XFCE, Openbox, or Enlightenment.
Because of Fedora15, and my loss of the desktop, I ventured into gnome with compiz. I was still being launcher driven instead of data driven. Now I am on XFCE and loving it. With yumex, I no longer have to suffer with the Gnome3 interfaces (with graphics off or graphics on). Yes, xfce is great. It is infact going to send the messages to both kde and gnome that ease of use is great for a tablet, but the unity/gnome interfaces are for tablets and not for developers. And we could be led to believe that Linux will eventually not support the desktop, but only support tablet devices.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
If I am a software developer, and I have a product to make available or sell, I would like it to be executable under any recent version of any GUI interface. Gnome 2.x, Gnome 3, KDE 4,x XFCE and lfce, etc. If Gnome starts with it's shenanigans, it wont be long before the big distributions (Red hat/Fedora/SUSE) and the Debian based distributions start to develop a common one, leaving Gnome out in the pasture to retire. The three important GUI interfaces in alphabetical sequence are Gnome, KDE, XFCE and MS Window7. I indicate MSW7 because users will flee the first three for the latter one.
Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
So why not have a separate group work on KDE 3 and just give it long-long-long term support? Clearly many people are sticking with it. Or just fork KDE 3, call it something else, and leave it exactly the same.
Best idea, if light is so important - don't install X or any GUI in the first place. Just work from command prompt, make emacs your operating environment, and off you go. Or use any shell - bash, ksh, ash, csh, whatever.
And no, I'm not Dick Stallman!!!
This is definitely something worth arguing about.
You're right, as I DO use both kde and gnome. One does say System Settings, the other is Control Center. Hence, I've run into the same situation with "screensaver: which now I have 2 entries, both of which are identical, but alas, click the wrong one, and it asks you if you want to shut down gnome. What a pity that Gnome & KDE devs have to act like a couple of kids in a sandbox, and you stole my toy.
What if there were other options as well available, like GNUSTEP? What would it do?
Can one start in KDE, have, let's say 3 workspaces, make the 2nd workspace GNOME and the 3rd GNUSTEP?? How about if one starts w/ either of the other 2, and wants to achieve the same thing?
I'm an oddball. I use several browsers - Firefox, Konqueror and Flock, KDE 4.3 and GNOME 2 (Don't have GNUSTEP). I also use some KDE apps, like KSpread, Krita... So I like to use the K apps on the KDE workspace, and the other apps, like Flock, on the GNOME workspace. Can that be done? Or would that need more code-bloat? :-)
This is why we can't have nice things.
Have something called Desktop settings (not system), and have sub-menus under it for GNOME, KDE, GNUSTEP, XFCE, TWM and what have you. Under each of these, have their respective applets.
But don't put system settings under this. Things, like configuring your network, setting your default printers, and other hardware related stuff, have it somewhere else, and make those apps independently accessible from all the above DEs