Ideas for Trisquel
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti
Hello Everyone,
(I will try to be short with this story) - I've been testing a lot of Ubuntu 12.04 based distributions in order to understand where does my "pm-powersave" problem come from. And one of the distros I've test was the beautiful (but not yet released) Elementary OS Luna. They have done a wonderful job and have dedicated a lot of effort into producing this gorgeous and fast distro based on Ubuntu 12.04.
I was thinking on building my own based on Ubuntu LTS (and this even knowing that they plan to go for a Rolling Distribution in the future). Then I've looked at the Fedora base, the Arch base and even the old - but still good - (Pure) Debian base. I've finally forgot the idea, not because of the difficulty but yes because of the lack of interest - I have a lot of ideas for a distribution but they are mainly centered in the Desktop itself and not in what's "inside the thing".
This is why I think that we - with "we" I am talking about me, but I am also giving some ideas for Trisquel itself - should stay with the LTS base and only update the rest. The whole idea was to separate the repositories (like Arch but in a different way), with the Core - that would contain all that is need for the System to work, the Main - that would integrate all the DE and Shells, the Apps - That will only have the applications internally created, and the Extra - that will provide anything else. The Extra repository could also be joined with the Apps repository in order to provide a dedicated repository for the Software Center that would be chosen by the administrator to see if it is Free Software or not - between a lot of quality terms.
But beside all this blablabla, which I believe will only interest a few - if not none - this is the actual point of this post :
Since I can't - because of time, interest and resources - create a new Distribution, beside the fact that this would be kind of "stupid" since we already have 2 (if not 3) Gnu Free Software Ubuntu based distributions - and so there is no need for another one - it would also be a lot of precious time that would be spent in something less important than the idea itself.
The idea itself is quite simple and here it is. Trisquel is fun, beautiful etc.. etc... but it could be better. I know that, mainly because of the lack of donations, it's kind of hard to already to the actual job of maintenance, so, talking about anything else would be a "shot in the foot". This is why I want to propose my help, but before I want to ask the opinion of the community.
The whole idea is to create an identity to Trisquel. Nowadays - and I can be totally wrong on this - Trisquel is seen as a Ubuntu with 2 releases behind but without non-free software. This need to change in order to bring more people, and so create more donations, and why not make it more used than Ubuntu itself ! This identity should be create by 2 things :
1 - Design
2 - Applications
(After that the 3º Part - which is the Marketing itself - would be done not by us but yes by other people from forums, blogs and other specialized websites.)
So how could we achieve that ? Simple ! We choose one technology and we create our applications with our design for it. We could create a Video Player only for Trisquel, a Music Player only for Trisquel, a Youtube Player only for Trisquel (basing its design on the first two), more :
- Calendar
- Clock
- Mail
- Messenger
- Browser
... and so on
This "...only for Trisquel" would be the identity that Trisquel needs ! This could be developed by the community (I am already doing the first 3 for myself as an experiment of QML but I could adapt them) and then used directly in every release as the "Default Applications".
But this project would need dedicated people with a simple code in order to provide bugfixes very fast by everyone - even those that understand just a little big of programming.
I don't have any mockup yet, but I could provide if necessary. The technology in question could be QML or Vala. But if you have a better suggestion then it would be appreciated.
PS: Note the following idea. If this project go further we can easily solve the most common problems from Trisquel, which are the outdated base compared to Ubuntu - since we only will be pushing the core from the LTS and the applications will be done in another repository when the time is come and when the application is stable, and even ThinkPenguin could sell more with a gorgeous and unique Free Distribution like Trisquel.
This is just and idea. Sorry for the long text. This topic is open to discussion and so I am.
Best Regards,
Luis Da Costa
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 2013-04-24 10:09, name at domain wrote:
>
> [...] This is why I think that we - with "we" I am talking about
> me, but I am also giving some ideas for Trisquel itself [...]
I'd strongly suggest you join the Dev meetings here:
https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/developer-meetings
...and take some time to read through this:
https://trisquel.info/en/wiki/proposed-policies-procedures-solutions
I beleve those two resources should be more useful than posting here.
With regards to general comments about Trisquel being "behind" Ubuntu,
I don't agree with that. I stopped using Ubuntu as my main desktop
with version 12.04 LTS for many reasons, and since Trisquel 5 I feel
like there aren't any strong, compelling reasons to run the latest Ubuntu.
I see many OEMs and large events, and in general other advocates
generally suggesting 12.04 LTS as it will be around for much longer
than the recent versions, so Trisquel's focus on release 6 seems
entirely appropriate and enough for all my personal and commercial uses.
Cheers,
F.
- --
Fabián Rodríguez
http://trisquel.magicfab.ca
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: PGP/Mime available upon request
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
iEYEARECAAYFAlF4NJ4ACgkQfUcTXFrypNXRTACgkxUm/21booSS3VxC6USjJBnq
Gq0AoJweynyCd6IDvHoLs/I1ss1LpXvO
=vctz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hi,
Thank you for the information. I will try to be at the next meeting (the next being Tuesday 30 April right ?).
When I say "behind Ubuntu" I am not saying that we need at all costs be on the same line as Ubuntu. I am just saying that we could use those LTS to help ourselves. What I mean is that we should be only using LTS and simply give them some identity other than the Free Software, the Wallpaper and the grey bottom bar with the Trisquel logo. We should remove - if they cannot be repaired - old applications that don't work or have serious problems like Pencil. And we should make the repository as clean and simple as necessary in order to make things more efficients and to give less work for the developers.
As a friend of mine - Software Engineer fan of the Apple products - once told me : "in order to work properly by any means the Operating System needs a good and rock solid base. If this first level is nicely made then the others would work as well if they are nicely made, otherwise everything will break and we will never understand why". And this is exactly in what I believe. I believe that Trisquel should use the Ubuntu LTS base simply because they are the best for the most recent software out there (otherwise we would be still using Debian and the 2.x kernel). But with that base in mind we should be building something new, something different and this only on the DE, Shell and Applications level.
>we should be only using LTS
we will no longer publish short term support versions every 6 months, but focus on giving the best possible support to the LTS release
-- https://trisquel.info/en/trisquel-60-lts-toutatis-has-arrived
I think the main problems of Trisquel are strongly correlated with the problems of free software in general.
A wide range of unsupported hardware and such things like the flash problem prevent people from using 100% free distros.
Improving the identity would make things better, but in my opinion, other things are more urgent.
I know that, but we can't solve those problem otherwise they would have been already solved. Thing go slowly but surely and one thing is sure : We can't wait for others do it. If we create a unique Distribution people will try it and will by the same way understand the idea behind is creation, some will stop using it and others will continue to use it. At the end more people will get interested in it and this will have the final resort of more support, more software, more donations and so on.
If I could I would help for the hardware part, but I am not even capable of solving my own "pm-powersave" problem. In the other hand I know how to program (I'm not an expert but I have some knowledge) and because of that I can help in this field and some would help in others.
That's somehow true.
My situation is a bit like yours. In principle I'm capable of programming (in C) because I did it very intensively during my thesis in theoretical physics, but of course I can't deal with real programs; they use tons of libraries and somewhere declared functions and types...
I like your idea and it is the right attitude. Nothing improves if no one does it.
My summer is not that full of work at the moment, so if this project really comes to life, I can join and do what I can.
Being capable of contributing something to Trisquel would be a great feeling.
Thank you for your support :D
Why not use only the default GNOME applications?
The new applications from GNOME 3.8 and 3.10 is beautiful and easy to use. (Music, Vídeos, Software, Web, Files...) [1][2][3][4]
I like the idea for one identity(is easy to see when you using Ubuntu. Trisquel is like KDE or Windows look - difficult to see difference sometimes), but is better to use one good upstream project like GNOME but I don't know if it's easy to use GNOME 3.8 or 3.10 with Ubuntu 12.04 base.
[1] https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/
[2] http://worldofgnome.org/gnome-3-8-core-utilities/
[3] http://worldofgnome.org/gnome-3-8-one-day-after-2/
[4] http://worldofgnome.org/gnome-3-8-applications/
We can't use those applications without the new GTK changes. So we need to be dependent on Gnome in order to use them (or just spend a lot of time editing them) and so use Gnome 3.8. I agree that the new Gnome 3.8 applications are just beautiful, but they are also very buggy and too much simple for a normal use - a good example is the Box project that we can already find in Fedora 18.
And with the news that probably Gnome 4 will be made in C# (I am not quite sure if it will be true C# aka Mono or if it will be Vala), I am starting to get scared if it really ends up with Mono - more and more now that monodevelop as been bought by Xamarim.
I would be surprised if GNOME would adopt C# as their main language. In C#, there are only three significant GNOME applications I am aware of: Banshee, F-Spot and Tomboy. All of them have recently lost a lot of popularity and alternatives (resp. Rhythmbox, Shotwell and GNote) have taken over. Besides, the GNOME project has recently declared JavaScript their favourite language for high-level applications, Vala was created by GNOME developers and is more and more popular, etc. To sum up: do you have any reference of what you wrote?
As lembas pointed out, Trisquel now is exclusively based on Ubuntu LTS. As for developing a set of Trisquel applications, that would require too far much (redundant) work in my opinion. That would basically amount to Trisquel becoming yet a new desktop environment project. Even Ubuntu cannot afford to go that far!
Trisquel, like any GNU/Linux distribution, is about putting together some applications developed elsewhere and selecting those in the default system as well as a default configuration (including a "distro look") or even writing patches for the applications. It is not as easy as it sounds! In particular, Trisquel now patches hundreds (thousands?) of packages to make them "FSF-compliant" instead of removing them (and all packages depending on them).
For coherence, a distribution usually chooses most of its default applications from a same desktop environment project (GNOME, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, etc.). I tend to think, like icarolongo (and, apparently, quidam), that GNOME still is the best desktop environment. People (you included) disagree on that... and that is OK because alternative desktop environments are a few clicks away. You want to remove this possibility. That would be a bad move in my opinion.
Hi Magic Banana,
I don't see GNOME as bad, I just see a bunch of bad choices, nothing else. I still continue to think that GNOME is the best DE in place with an excelent base. Now with Gnome 3 we can edit the whole shell with just a couple of Javascript lines in order to create something totally new. I love KDE but there is a lot more problems to solve than with GNOME.
My problem here is not with GNOME itself but with his applications and choices.
The Gnome Music application will only be available on the 3.9 version (if it is finished in time). Banshee depends on Mono and rhythmbox is getting old and starts to have a lack of maintenance. We have problems with compiz (which only have been solved, and partially, with Ubuntu 13.04). And the list continue.
I am not saying that I hate all that. I am just proposing to create a new image for Trisquel. One where, piece-by-piece, it will be starting to not depend on others Software. Trisquel is already (somehow) doing this with Firefox, and I know a lot of people which used Trisquel and when they use another Free Software Distribution, just want to use Abrowser and nothing else. But then I ask, why not using IceCat ? Instead of that the choice was pointer to the creationg of a new browser that would be, nothing more nothing less then clean Firefox browser.
But then I can also ask. Why not going into the "less problems, more beauty" by just creating a Gnome Shell based on the actual Trisquel visual ? Like this we would be using the Clutter and the Gnome 3 goodness but with the Trisquel beauty and style. A little bit like Cinnamon, and we wouldn't have the "color bar problems" (this is just one exemple of some problem that Trisquel is facing on each version where a lot of thing changes and users get lost).
You know, I understand the difficulty of this Idea, I also understand what you are trying to say and I mostly agree with it. But I just think that Trisquel needs a new image, a new promotion, something that would say "This comes from Trisquel" in order for people to start asking "What is Trisquel ?" or "Why doesn't it come with Flash ?".
We can't integrate QT5.0 and with his QtMultimedia 5.0 for Video and Audio godness without "breaking some packaging version rules with Trisquel and Ubuntu base" but we have Vala and the wonderful Eclipse, Anjuta and Monodevelop plugin for development (beside the - always beautiful - gedit and emacs tools for that same task), but we can still produce something beautiful, unique and easy to maintain. The idea is something like that : "Done simply and beautifully for the Distro = Less Maintenance".
What I can try to do, is to create (even if it is only for me, or only for learning) a Trisquel's "Visual Based" Shell for Gnome 3 (like Cinnamon) and see if it works well. This can be a good start or directly the present the idea with working projects.
AIUI from the bits of developer meeting minutes I've read (
http://trisquel.info/en/wiki/developer-meetings ) there's a Trisquel
Gitorious instance and something Trisquel that fills the same niche
as PPAs coming. Very likely by the time you have your first app at
0.1 to raise interest there'll be the systems in place for you to
provide a Trisquel Remix to your choosing. So there's nothing to
stop you coding and doing what you want.
If you were only referring simple tunings of existing applications (such as writing extensions to GNOME Shell), then I agree. However, you seemed to talk about "creat[ing] our applications". That is a lot of work and I really do not understand how it would translate into "less maintenance". You point out that it takes the GNOME project much time to write new applications and to maintain the existing one... and there are tens (hundreds?) of developers behind GNOME against 1-2 developer(s) for Trisquel!
Abroswer is not a "new browser". It is the upstream Firefox (shipped every 1.5 month) + some patches (most if not all of them being automatically applied). If the Trisquel project had to maintain a Web browser, it would certainly fail. The pace at which the Web standards are evolving requires tens of full-time developers to follow it.
If Mozilla's trademark would not force a name change, Trisquel's browser would be named "Firefox". The hundreds of other applications Trisquel patches do not have their names changed. I do not see much point in changing the name of an application (unless you have to like in Mozilla's case). Sure, Trisquel would look more unique if its components would bear different names... but 1) that would not be kind towards the developers who would not receive any credit, 2) most (potential) users actually want to know what software they are using (or will be using) and 3) the contributions such as bug reports had better been proposed upstream (so, upstream has to be identifiable).
Today, many Trisquel bugs are closed after quidam stating that it should be fixed upstream. If Trisquel renames its applications, this would only worsen the current situation. If Trisquel would have its own unique applications, then the problems grows since somebody would actually have to take care of the bugs (and of the developments!). Again: that is far too much work.
I am just saying that we should create something unique where it is necessary. For example, why re-create Nautilus if it work so well ? We can just solve the problem with the new versions by following the Ubuntu example by keeping the old Nautilus 3.2 on the 3.4 Gnome base. Why change Gnome System Monitor ? And so on. But some applications could be change because they can cause problems in the future and the upstream projects are not maintained actively which will, with time, make it necessary to fork them.
I know that Abrowser is nothing more than Firefox itself with some patches and a new name because of the trademark, but that alone create an unique browser for Free Software Users to be identified (the same way Trisquel did with the Gnu/Linux Distributions just after gNewSense).
I just think that create new alternatives, and by this I am talking about the Community and not the developers themselves , Trisquel can make the difference. I am not asking the Trisquel developers to do more that what they can and are doing (and this even knowing the low amount of donations) I am just saying that, promoting this kind of ideas in order to help improve Trisquel in a new way can be good for everyone and by this I mainly mean the Trisquel Project.
I am a member!
there are some things that really need done... bug reporting....
spellcheck doesn't work in trisquel for example. then again it doesn't work in ubuntu in some places.
libreoffice is an example. firefox... is another. not sure what needs to be done for firefox. libreoffice probably just needs it installed.
For the bug reporting I agree with you it need to be done. But some changes can't be made. I remember reading a bunch of bug reports on the issues page that couldn't be solved because it has been updated in the newest version of Ubuntu and not on the 12.04 - I can talk about the gfx bug with nouveau in grub, all the compiz window snapping bugs and even the problem with some applications that don't even work nicely.. (Correct me if I'm wrong... but we are talking about "Bug Reports" and not about a "Bug Reporting" application right ?)
As for the spellcheck, it is the same old problem. It works everywhere where the use of "myspell" is a standard. Because of this we can have a good spellchecking (with a lot of languages) using Firefox 3.5 for example but not the new ones which depend on "hunspell" - this is why I've created the Portuguese and Portuguese-Brazilian hunspell package a few months ago. Hunspell become a standard in a lot of Software (and even on Mac OsX since the 10.6 version). The same applies with LibreOffice since the 2.0.2 version.
But once again we are talking about the same problem. Many of these changes won't be accepted - mine hasn't - because it needs to be included in the mainstream in order to be used in Trisquel (at least this is what I've been told).
Maybe with all the time I've been "out" some things have changed but this is the whole idea I've got.
- Login o registrati per inviare commenti