Would you be interested in a trisquel-unity metapackage?
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires
Would you guys ever be interested in a trisquel-unity metapackage for the Unity experience on Trisquel 5.5 and above? It would be Unity 2d and have the Trisquel themes and icons of course and offer that experience on our favorite OS.
I've been tempted to create it myself for personal use but would only tinker with it after 5.5 is released and the team's themes and icons are finalized. It would be nice to get this locked down and perfect in time for the 6.0 release (based off of Ubuntu 12.04) and give users an option.
I'm tempted to give it a shot. Would you?
I am a member!
I think it's a reasonable option to offer in 5.5, perhaps as an extra,
stored in a ppa? Depending on community response, it maybe, could be
included in the 5.5 or 6.0 dvd editions, such as the I18N? Speaking of
this edition, I wonder if it could be packaged with the gnome-fallback
session as the default, since it is the most-accessible at present?
Cheerio,
Dave
On 02/05/2012 04:18 PM, name at domain wrote:
> Would you guys ever be interested in a trisquel-unity metapackage for
> the Unity experience on Trisquel 5.5 and above? It would be Unity 2d and
> have the Trisquel themes and icons of course and offer that experience
> on our favorite OS.
>
> I've been tempted to create it myself for personal use but would only
> tinker with it after 5.5 is released and the team's themes and icons are
> finalized. It would be nice to get this locked down and perfect in time
> for the 6.0 release (based off of Ubuntu 12.04) and give users an option.
>
> I'm tempted to give it a shot. Would you?
I am not personaly interested by Unity desktop and not even in Gnome-shell. I would be more interested in a desktop that looks more like Gnome 3 classic or something like Cinnamon. At least Xfce.
What is wrong with the package currently in Trisquel 5.0 Dagda (that is a real question: I have not tried it): http://packages.trisquel.info/dagda/unity-2d
The 3D version is in the repositories too: http://packages.trisquel.info/dagda/unity
Well, you guys have meta packages like "trisquel-mini" that makes sure the right themes and settings are loaded for that desktop environment (LXDE) and the same could be applied to Unity.
I'm finding myself installing unity-2d, then fishing around finding a GTK3 compatible theme and icon pack that looks like it would fit the existing 5.0 color scheme. I tried putting myself in the shoes of someone who may start using Trisquel from scratch and going straight to Unity.
What is the name of the GTK2 theme that is used in Trisquel 4.0 to 5.0? If there is also a GTK3 theme that is in the repos or is being made, then that would be easier.
A matching gtk3 theme is in testing phase.
For my use of Trisquel (desktop computer), I don't need Unity.
No one is forcing your hand. Any of us can use Gnome Shell, Unity, MATE, XFCE, LXDE, or Cinnamon without an issue. I am aware of that and understand your decision. I'm also aware of the group think mentality with the Linux community to bash Unity just because it is different.
I am a member!
The group think might be correct to some degree in many cases although I'm not convinced it is here.
It seems to me that unity was designed to take advantage of widescreen displays and touch interfaces. Tablets, Netbooks, and maybe phones.
While I didn't initatlly realize that Canonical was dropping support for the desktop in 11.04 I think it became apparent with the release of 11.10 that it was likely heading in that direction. They no longer support Gnome and Unity is not a desktop targeted UI.
Now there has been certain things said by the company that suggest they are in fact refocusing efforts. They left just enough room to give us the impression that they are not completely abandoning the desktop.
If people remember back a ways Mark Shuttleworth said he would not continue to fund Canonical forever. There were certain things implied at the time that if the things they were focusing on did not succede in a number of years...
I think that time has come and we are seeing it. The problem with all these companies (Redhat, Corel, Mandrivia, Linspire, Xandros, Canonical, etc) who have focused on the desktop at one time or another is they continue to follow the same path. I think Linspire was one of the first which deviated slightly.
We need a new community focused approach to the GNU/Linux desktop.
We can take advantage of numbers to help fund development.
It is interesting to see what LinuxMint is doing for funding. They are taking advantage of the numbers by charging search engine to be included in the distribution. Mozilla also does this with the version of Firefox they distribute. LinuxMint doesn't have anywehre near the developer base that Canonical has although the point is they have sought other funding sources. They also have companies sponsoring them.
Trisquel has also done some things differently with the donations. I've noticed a few other projects seem to be succeding with this approach. OpenShot being one of them. It isn't nearly enough money to fund a single full time developer although it is a start. It might be 3/70 of the amount needed.
Canonical gets a little funding from the music player. I don't think it is much although it could bring in a little revenue.
There may be an opertunity to generate funds from advertising. Creating a default search page similar to Google. Maybe one that is stored on the system itself (cached) for instant loading and could be customised. For instance the button for email might link to any number of email providers. The defaults might be sold to one email provider or another. The default search engine might be sold to another. Users could subscribe to RSS feeds for news headlines displayed on the front page similar to Yahoo! if desired.
There may be an opertunity to generate funds by giving users the opertunity to get involved financially. Users could submit features they want. Then other users could put money on the ones they want implimented. The more money a particulare feature has on it the more likely it will be implimented. This really has a two-fold effect. It ensures the features most wanted get implimented and it raises money for the project. CodeWeaver's uses a similar system to this in combination with selling licenses (restrictive, not GPL).
Another idea is charging for commercial support. This is largely being done already for free through the forums. Technical users could donate time and end-users could get better support. The way such a system might work is this. A user submits a problem with a reward. A technical user submits a solution. If the solution is accepted by the end-user the technical user would recieve a portion of the reward and the developers would recieve the rest.
I am a translator!
While it does sound interesting to charge people for providing technical support, I think it will go too far for this small community.
Commercially sold support should mean help in really bad situations. Maybe even going to the customer and fixing something. Most support that is done on this forum is giving people one-liners in bash to find something out about their systems, or pointing them to something on gnu.org, or h-node.com, or libre.thinkpenguin.com even. That's not the kind of help one should charge for, or else people will just go over to Ubuntu forums and ask there.
I am a member!
It was just one of the ideas of course. It would take a combination to really bring in money. In any case I think it has potential for the future as new users uptake GNU/Linux and Trisquel. Right now the user base is small. There are Trisquel users who are able and content to pay for technical support though- even now.
The other thing is I didn't mean users would be forced to pay. It is an incentive scheme. If someone offers you $100 USD for somethig you don't know anything about although can easiily find or figure out the answer to they might just get an answer. If you are offered nothing that probably won't happen.
Another example. Maybe you do know the answer. Maybe the user isn't technical enough to follow your instructions though. Packaging a small script for them would solve that although takes more of your time than you have available. Likely this is due to the fact you have a technical job that takes up much of that time. $50 USD could solve that. That in-house would-otherwise-be propritary software you write for your day job is no longer as essential as it once was.
Definately not interested. My desktop is not an I Phone and I don't want it to look like one.
What I am interested in is more themes for Trisquel because the ones we have - especially the green Dagda colour - are really not my taste at all
Then you are probably not the target audience. There is a demographic that maybe does want their OS "like an iPhone" or simply likes a big navigational bar on the left and OSX like menus. I have seen people who have moved their Windows taskbar on the left side of the screen and this would cater to them.
Linux in general still scares off a lot of casual users and the ones that use it work with a lot of fragmentation on the desktop. To be honest, most people are moving away from PCs and laptops onto smartphones and tablets so trying to reinvent the desktop may not be that important anymore.
Trisquel is a VERY small percentage of an operating system that hovers around 1%. Why not stand out a little more as a totally free operating system? Like I said before, there will always be the people who want a traditional desktop and stick with XFCE, LXDE, or Gnome 2 like interface. There will also be others who want a little bit more simplicity and eye candy and be intrigued by Unity.
I am a translator!
I agree that there are people who want more eyecandy and OSlike stuff. I like some eyecandy and the globalmenu-applet too. But Unity really isn't about simplicity. I find it very hard and unnatural and I only watched someone use it. It sure utilizes the widescreens of netbooks better, but why cripple everyone with it?
Canonical made a cool alternative interface for users with smaller devices, like tiny netbooks and smartphones. Great. But why force it onto the desktop users? In the end it's not tragical or something, I can't imagine there won't be any traditional DEs in the repository. Just seems like a premature and stupid decision to make Unity standard on all installations of Ubuntu.
Oh I wasn't saying to make it the default desktop. Just have the metapackage there just in case someone wants it because unity-2d is already in the repositories by default as you can see here.
Heck the reasoning behind it for me was to migrate family members to Trisquel and I can start with an installation of Mini (if they want classic) and add Unity-2d so they can try it out. If they don't like it, I can make LXDE the default or install XFCE.
I like the option of having a choice. After all, that is why we use Linux (or GNU/Linux as you like to call it) to begin with.
I'd be interested in a Trisquel-Unity metapackage, but I think it would require some engineering to replace the "Ubuntu" button with a Trisquel button - I think Ubuntu hard-codes things like this.
Gotta say Unity is growing on me... Are there any Trisquel themes for it?
Grvrulz does an amazing job with gtk2 and gtk3 themes and in the past I wanted him to tweak the theme to make it unity capable. I have not tried to install unity on 5.5 yet so my feedback is limited.
I am glad that this thread about trisquel-unity metapackage has not been forgotten and there are others out there besides me that want to see this happen.
Thank you for your kind words :)
As far as Unity is concerned, the current Trisquel theme should work with it. There's only a small issue in unity-2d, where the buttons on the panel are ugly, but that's a known bug in unity-2d. And if you and other guys interested can test and find out any bugs, I'll fix theme as soon as I can :)
P.S. I have no understanding of gtk2 themeing :P
With this Unity 2D bug, does it affect both the Ubuntu 11.10 and 12.04 codebases or is it just 11.10? If it has been fixed in 12.04 and can be easily implemented in Trisquel 6.0, that would be awesome.
As for 11.10, I will install 5.5 in VirtualBox and play around with Unity 2D. Once me and others on this forum can share our results, it would be awesome to see where this can go.
I'll say it again where Unity supported on a totally free distro could be a good way to advertise Trisquel. I've submitted a news story about 5.5s release to WebUpd8 and had no idea that it would go onto deaf ears. I also noticed that the Linux Action Show turned down our requests to review 5.5 as well.
I installed unity-2d and after rebooting there's an option in gdm as 'Ubuntu
Unity 2D'.
The icon in the sidebar is also the ubuntu one.
Hmm I did an "apt-get install unity-2d" on a clean install of Trisquel 5.5 and "Unity 2D" does not show up in the DE selection list in GDM or LightDM. The system wanted me to restart and I did. Still no listing.
Does anyone know why this isn't showing up even if installed?
I installed unity-2d and after rebooting there's an option in gdm as 'Ubuntu Unity 2D'.
The icon in the sidebar is also the ubuntu one.
Duplicate post
Grvrulz does an amazing job with gtk2 and gtk3 themes and in the past I
wanted him to tweak the theme to make it unity capable. I have not tried to
install unity on 5.5 yet so my feedback is limited.
I am glad that this thread about trisquel-unity metapackage has not been
forgotten and there are others out there besides me that want to see this
happen.
I am not a big fan of unity or gnome shell, but probably the trisquel-unity meta package is a good way to attrack ubuntu users to trisquel community.
I am a member!
This from another non-fan of Unity: Agreed, make the Unity 2d
meta-package, so we don't run into issues with the limited availability
of non-free support for acceleration on some video hardware.
-Dave
On 04/23/2012 04:06 PM, name at domain wrote:
> I am not a big fan of unity or gnome shell, but probably the
> trisquel-unity meta package is a good way to attrack ubuntu users to
> trisquel community.
Using Unity could also be a good PR move. Last time I checked, only one distribution besides Ubuntu was providing it as default DE. Providing a fancy 3D Unity desktop and a nice 2D Unity fallback would put Trisquel on the map, when people start discussing Unity.
I am not a big fan of unity or gnome shell, but probably the trisquel-unity
meta package is a good way to attrack ubuntu users to trisquel community.
- Vous devez vous identifier ou créer un compte pour écrire des commentaires