gmane.comp.gnome.desktop

Introducing libzapojit

Debarshi Ray — 2012-05-23T15:51:45

Hello everybody,

I have been working on a GLib/GObject wrapper for the Skydrive and Hotmail
APIs: https://www.gitorious.org/libzapojit

At the moment its dependencies include json-glib-1.0, rest-0.7, libsoup-2.4
and goa-1.0. If required, goa-1.0 can be made optional.

I would like to move it to GNOME infrastructure and make a release in time for
3.5.2. I intend to use it to support Skydrive in gnome-documents:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/666535

Happy hacking,
Debarshi

Re: FSF's role in GNOME (was Re: Fwd: Questions for the boardelection candidates)

Juanjo Marín — 2012-05-22T21:55:38




----- Mensaje original -----



I'm a _very_ modest GNOME contributor and I value the FSF and I'm happy to 
have the FSF in our Advisory Board.

Cheers,

    -- Juanjo Marin

Re: FSF's role in GNOME (was Re: Fwd: Questions for the boardelection candidates)

Bradley M. Kuhn — 2012-05-22T21:38:14

Oh, I didn't mean to indicate I was the only one!  But, I can of course
only speak for myself.  Meanwhile, I think the work that's done by FSF
through the Advisory Board that I've been a part is, *by itself*, a
valuable contribution that GNOME gets from FSF, without even considering
the other overlap points.


If there is, I'm not directly aware of it currently.  But as always, I'm
happy to continue to serve in my role as diplomat between the two orgs. ;)
Sadly, I won't make it to GUADEC this year, but I'm generally always
available if there are any FSF/GNOME Foundation intersection points that
need attention.

   -- bkuhn

Re: FSF's role in GNOME (was Re: Fwd: Questions for the board electioncandidates)

Brian Cameron — 2012-05-22T13:05:22

Thanks, Bradley, you and the FSF have done a lot.  There would not be a
GNOME Women's Outreach program if not for the FSF, for example.


Considering the Executive Director of GNOME is from the SFLC, it seems
rather unlikely that any such severing would even be possible.


I'd hardly say that you, Bradley, are the only person who values the FSF
who also contributes to GNOME.


I do as well.  As you say, GNOME and the FSF do sometimes disagree on
specific things.  But, it is healthy for organizations to be able to
disagree on points, I think.

I guess I do not see what would be accomplished by severing ties with
the FSF.  It hasn't seemed like there has been really that much tension
between GNOME and the FSF lately.

Brian

Re: Fwd: Questions for the board election candidates

Germán Póo-Caamaño — 2012-05-22T19:18:53

Why are you using desktop-devel-list y no foundation-list for replying
question related to GNOME Foundation candidacies?

FSF's role in GNOME (was Re: Fwd: Questions for the board electioncandidates)

Bradley M. Kuhn — 2012-05-22T18:45:34

I suppose it goes without saying that I disagree with David Nielsen's
points about FSF, but I wanted to draw attention to one specific issue.

gnomeuser< at >gmail.com wrote today:

As most on this list know, I've been the GNOME Advisory Board as FSF's
representative for the last decade.  Since, as a non-profit, FSF receives
Advisory Board membership with no fees, I've always felt it was right to
"give back" in volunteer time (instead of cash [0]) to GNOME.  In that
capacity, I've done a number of things to help GNOME.  Here are a few
examples from just the last two years:

  * Answered numerous licensing questions from GNOME developers on a
    regular basis.

  * Assisted in the hiring of a sysadmin position, helped recruit the
    current GNOME Foundation Executive Director, and participated in the
    hiring committee for the Executive Director position.

  * Co-drafted GNOME's Copyright Policies, at the request of GNOME
    Foundation's Board:
         http://live.gnome.org/CopyrightAssignment
         http://live.gnome.org/CopyrightAssignment/Guidelines

I do volunteer work like this because FSF wants to help GNOME.  I do it in
the spirit of goodwill and affiliation among the two organizations.

Obviously, if GNOME's new Board takes a policy to sever its association
with FSF, I'd be presumably kicked off the Advisory Board and would cease
my ongoing volunteer work for GNOME that I do on behalf of FSF.  I suppose
if you feel these contributions above have tarnished GNOME's image, then
that would make sense.  However, I think even that small list of recent
contributions alone shows that GNOME *does* receive direct, valuable
benefits from FSF, in addition to other intangible benefits that I think
are useful.

GNOME project was founded as part of GNU precisely because GNOME was the
Free Software desktop project most dedicated to the principles of software
freedom that FSF has championed.  I have always felt the two organizations

Fwd: Questions for the board election candidates

2012-05-22T17:07:00

2012/5/22 Robert Nordan <rpvn< at >robpvn.net>:

I prefer Open Source, though I reject that it is a pragmatic approach,
I find that it focuses on what I care about in the context namely the
code and it's openness rather than pushing a social agenda. I greatly
dislike the FSF and their often counter productive extremist views and
actions, I do not believe it to be in GNOMEs best interest to continue
our association with them. Doing so would only serve to allow them to
further tarnish our image with little if any benefit to GNOME in
return.


I don't consider myself qualified to make a promise on the future of
our git instance and I doubt the GNOME Board would even have the
authority to make a specific promise on what would be a technical
matter. However I do agree having used github that it is a fantastic
platform and I wish that GNOME was as capable. That being said one of
github's advantages is that everything is on there (much like everyone
is on twitter and facebook) and we will never be able to match that
part of the github experience but maybe we should at least consider
maintaining a mirror on github for visibility.

The developer experience is going to be vital for GNOME OS to
eventually be successful so I believe we will need to put in a lot of
work making it pleasant every step of the way from writing and
maintaining an application to deploying it on GNOME's everywhere.


There absolutely is a schism, to deny that would be folly. I do hope
we can find common ground and I am currently talking to a few people
to see what we can do to bring the parties closer together. I suspect
Ubuntu in shipping a default desktop that isn't GNOME3 but is based on
common foundations will always have to carry a delta or have some
elements forked. Currently that delta is fairly large and some of
Ubuntu's technology bets have not been adopted (such as utouch),
getting that addressed to me is the highest priority. I am currently
investigating how far down we can get that delta for them without
having to compromise GNOME or Ubuntu's desktops.

Initially I hope we can get a few stakeholders from each camp together
at a hackfest to explore how much of Unity one could implement within
gnome-shell via extensions, the hope being that Ubuntu could
eventually move to either a fully on extension based Unity (seems
unlikely) or having only something akin to Linux Mint's Cinnamon fork
in terms of a delta to maintain from GNOME. That to me would be a big
step in the direction of reintegrating Ubuntu into the GNOME ecosystem
and I hope there is willingness to at least explore such a long term
solution. I believe it would be worthwhile for GNOME to fund such a
task fully or in part and I will happily commit to raising funds for
the initial hackfest as my number one priority after being elected.


I think GNOME is right to insist on strong design driven development,
I think GNOME3 is fantastic as a result of electing to have such
strong opinions. As not everyone agrees with the decisions that has
let to, I think it is only natural for others to explore other
options, our liberal open source licensing gives them the right and
the opportunity to do so. However I see the space to cooperate in the
two known cases as being very small, both Cinnamon and Mate are
attempts to recreate or slightly improve the desktop metaphor as we
knew it in GNOME2 whereas GNOME3 is a completely new approach. I would
think that the cases where cooperation makes sense it will happen
naturally, no schism seems to exist currently and I doubt one will
emerge any time soon.

- David Nielsen
_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list< at >gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

First release of Evolution-ActiveSync (v0.92) for Evolution 3.4

David Woodhouse — 2012-05-22T14:06:52

It's syncing to download.gnome.org slowly, but for now is available at
ftp://ftp.infradead.org/pub/activesyncd/evolution-activesync-0.92.tar.xz
ftp://ftp.infradead.org/pub/activesyncd/evolution-activesync-0.92.tar.xz.asc

This is now updated to work with Evolution 3.4. As before, this package
contains the core dæmon for communication with the ActiveSync server, as
well as a Camel back end and Evolution EPlugin for configuring it.

SyncEvolution modules for calendar and addressbook synchronisation are
part of the SyncEvolution repository. We don't have 'direct' Evolution
calendar and addressbook back ends yet, although that would be nice.

Re: Some points about IM integration

Aron Xu — 2012-05-22T00:22:59

Hi,

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 12:43 AM, Peng Huang <shawn.p.huang< at >gmail.com> wrote:

I didn't mean anything that any IMF is bad, and IBus is particular
outstanding as its initial design and further implementation are
proofed by a large user base than Fcitx or any other (except SCIM, but
it's out of scope here).

Of course I know that people would like to see progress on doing
something, but IMHO currently the result can be frustrating.


As said in previous E-mail, this result is so theoretical. If other
parts GNOME is willing to improve user experience of IMF, they should
already be working on fixing bugs in GTK+, which are usually something
that IMF cannot work around. Improving the appearance of input
experience is something good, but IMHO we are on the wrong way.

Also there is concern that users of other IMFs will be ignored,
because "man power is limited". In the end, if another IMF expose a
problem in some GNOME software, the users will be told to use IBus or
go away. This result is extremely unfriendly and is probably going to
make more users leave.

IMF users are mainly CJK, and Chinese has a very large share. If GNOME
want to keep those users, and corporations behind GNOME would like to
see their products to be accepted by more CJK users, then GNOME will
need to have a look at what leading input method providers do on other
platforms to improve experience.

Here are two sets of screenshots of Sougou Pinyin and QQ Pinyin on
Windows. The user count of these two input method is larger than GNOME
all over the world (just some rough calculation):

https://live.gnome.org/InputCJK/Windows/Sougou
https://live.gnome.org/InputCJK/Windows/QQ

I agree some features present above are not needed, but the overall
appearance is representing what's a modern input "experience".


I had a quick look at the code on git.gnome.org, which seems not
written by fujiwara, it does not prevent the use of other IMF but when
users use xkb and IMF together, they'll get a not working environment.

Such breakage is cased by other GNOME developers' poor understanding
of "how IMF works", and it's obvious they don't use IMF everyday so
understandable. Weng has already started a conversation with Rui Matos
to help him improve the status, but I haven't seen any new commits.


IMHO the reason we need such workload to _integrate_ IMF to GNOME is
because there are technical design flaws in the project, which make
developers and users have a hard time in the name of experience.


We are continuously moving forward, but never give users a "good
enough" experience, one of the reasons is that we are continuously
breaking existing efforts.


--
Regards,
Aron Xu

Re: Redesign Gnote as Notes?

Aurimas Černius — 2012-05-21T20:09:11

Hi,


This simply means, that both Gnote and Tomboy go in a similar direction.
Either can become Notes, the other will be an alternative with it's own
advantages.



Not on mine, I'll continue to develop Gnote as I did. And I didn't
expect, that peoples interest in Tomboy or Gnote will change. I think
good ideas will find their way into both applications.

Re: Some points about IM integration

Peng Huang — 2012-05-21T16:43:21

I am glade to hear you also think ibus is a good choice right now. And we
were discussing and working on IM integration with gnome community from
2010. We really want to get some progress instead of waiting forever.

And I also think it is a good to integrate gnome desktop with an IMF as
soon as possible, because we can get user feedback and find some really
problems early. And then we could continue improving it.

And I also believe Fujiwarat's patches will not forbid using other IMFs
with gnome 3. We already considered it. Even if in future, GNOME 3 decides
to replace ibus with a new better IMF, it should not be difficult. And most
source code could be reused.  And the new IMF could learn from the IM Gnome
integration as well. It could benefit both IM and Gnome communities.

I don't think support multi-IMF at beginning is a good idea. It need much
efforts which can not be afforded right now. I think workable way is
integrating with one IMF at first, and may support multi-IMF in following
iterations. I think IM communities will contribute those efforts.

I hope Gnome could become more non-technical user-friendly, and Linux be
successful in Desktop area as well.


On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Aron Xu <aronxu< at >gnome.org> wrote:

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list< at >gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: Some points about IM integration

Aron Xu — 2012-05-21T14:24:20

Hi,

Thanks for your info! But we are just trying to stop the discussion
about "which IMF is better", because it's not the right time for GNOME
to choose one.

Even though I personally vote for Fcitx _if we must choose_, I agree
that IBus is a nice piece of software, and its developers (especially
you and fujiwara) are nice people.

But unfortunately, now we need try to give enough information to GNOME
people so that they can know what's IMF and how it works. And only
then it's the time to start further discussion about this feature,
IMHO.

Re: Some points about IM integration

Peng Huang — 2012-05-21T14:14:28

Another Input Methods introduction slides -- http://goo.gl/ag7gX



On Mon, May 21, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Peng Huang <shawn.p.huang< at >gmail.com>wrote:

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list< at >gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: Some points about IM integration

Peng Huang — 2012-05-21T14:09:22

Hello everyone, I am one of IBus owners. Please allow me to feed some
information for IBus.

 * http://goo.gl/9LlX5 , here is a doc which gives some background of ibus
project.
 * IBus is bus central multiprocess architecture, benefits are:
  ** Engines are separated by system process.
  ** Engines can not affect each other.
  ** Engine can not access data from other engines and IMF.
  ** One engine can not crash whole IMF.
 * IBus is well maintain project and IBus community is very active.
  ** Changes for ibus from 2012-01-01 (framework only, does not include
each engines): 239 files changed, 34665 insertions(+), 31937 deletions(-)
  ** https://github.com/ibus/ibus/commits/master
 * IBus is a well managed project, we have good code review process to
guarantee code quality. http://goo.gl/Gw8qQ
 * IBus supports CJKI and 30+ languages (Sorry I can not get accurate
number).
 * IBus supports handwriting as well.
  ** http://code.google.com/p/ibus-handwrite/
  ** https://github.com/yusukes/ibus-zinnia
 * Most major Linux distributions are using ibus.
 * Chromium OS is using ibus as IMF. Chromium OS community contributed many
efforts to ibus as well.
 * IBus is very popular in CJKI and etc. http://www.ohloh.net/p/ibus  235
users. (Comparing 11 users of  fcitx http://www.ohloh.net/p/fcitx)

Comparing fcitx with ibus
 * fcitx was developed as Chinese input methods from beginning. In other
words, the origin project goal is not IMF.
 * IBus was developed as IMF from day one.
 * fcitx is using single process architecture. The single process
architecture is not suit for IMF. It has been approved by SCIM and other IM
projects. That can not be resolved without re-implementing it from scratch.
 * Some Chinese IMEs of fcitx may have better UX than engines for IBus. But
ibus is only a framework. It is not Chinese input method. We can improve or
provide Chinese IMEs in separate projects for IBus.

IBus update:
 * In ibus-1.5, Python UI is replaced by vala language implementation. Vala
will be translate to C. So it has similar performance and memory foot print
of C language. Only setup UI is python.
 * Python pinyin engine has been replaced by C++ version in 2009. Only
setup UI is python.


Peng Huang


On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Ma Xiaojun <damage3025< at >gmail.com> wrote:

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list< at >gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: gnome goals for 3.6

Matthias Clasen — 2012-05-21T13:52:27


<big> is equivalent to scale=1.2
_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list< at >gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: Redesign Gnote as Notes?

Richard Hughes — 2012-05-21T13:15:07

Nirvana. Beer tokens to Casey. Thanks dude.

Richard.

Re: Redesign Gnote as Notes?

2012-05-21T13:09:11

2012/5/20 Aurimas Černius <aurisc4< at >gmail.com>:

I have already mentioned this before but the Tomboy developers have
started the process of transforming Tomboy into the Notes application.
Jared Jennings has already previously started work on a presentation
screen that will easily transformed into parts of the Notes design,
additionally we have a big hackfest coming up next month where lots of
this work is going to be performed. Likewise Tomboy will be redesigned
to have a proper library for Note access which will allow Tomboy to
present multiple frontends so fit natively on multiple platforms. I
believe Allan Day has scheduled some time to talk to the relevant
Tomboy developers about how to best execute the Notes design.

I figure that might have baring on any decision to invest work in GNotes.

Kind regards,
David

_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list< at >gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Re: Redesign Gnote as Notes?

Will Thompson — 2012-05-21T13:08:05

That would be Casey Harkins: 
https://github.com/charkins/gnome-shell-extension-notesearch works with 
both Gnote and Tomboy.

(As the README says, it would be nice if Gnote and Tomboy implemented 
this themselves.)

Re: Redesign Gnote as Notes?

Richard Hughes — 2012-05-21T13:02:54

Yes, I'm a heavy gnotes user and would also appreciate the gnotes
codebase being transformed into notes. On a related topic, I'll buy
the person who makes my notes searchable from the shell several beers.

Richard.

Re: Redesign Gnote as Notes?

Matthias Clasen — 2012-05-21T12:48:03


Hey Aurimas, that is really great.

Thanks for considering the new design. I would really love to see
gnote move towards that, so that the many happy gnote users can remain
happy in GNOME 3.
_______________________________________________
desktop-devel-list mailing list
desktop-devel-list< at >gnome.org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list

Redesign Gnote as Notes?

Aurimas Černius — 2012-05-20T16:44:26

Hi all,

I like the idea of Notes in general:
https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Notes

I think we could transform Gnote into Notes. I made some initial
proof-of-concept, you can see results here:
http://aurisc4.blogspot.com/2012/05/notes-demo.html

This is of course only an initial work, but I'm willing to continue it.
Any comments/ideas?