fc15 - LOOKING GOOD! maybe i can ditch Ubuntu 10.10 and come home soon:)

[tripleninez]

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to pass along, how wonderful Fedora 15 is shaping up to be.

I have a nightly snapshot running (from yesterday).

semi-recently, i had to move away from Fedora, my favorite distro, as i wasn't impressed with fedora 14. I had joined the "fusion-linux" team, only to discover that i had little interest in actually using 14 alltogether.

I mainly use Linux for multimeida and pro-audio applications (but also for work), and while Fedora 13 was excellent ~ i (still) use it on one machine as a headless environment - setup as a synth-module / plugin host / looper - very similar to Muse research's "Receptor" products (but made with a fraction of the costs).

Part of the problem with Fedora 14 was;

- no CCRMA repo
- 14 seemed to lack the stability
- much harder to setup and run various applications (then some other distros)
- seemed as though 14 had very little to offer over fedora 13.
- no rt-kernel, although it doesn't really matter - i just hacked away at Zen-kernel (2.6.35 & .37) until I had a kernel good enough for pro-audio applications (it works great)

But now, with both the recent changes to Gnome-shell / gnome3 stack, the addition of systemd, and more integration with Btrfs - i am very excited! hopefully, fsck will have proper btrfs support soon? i can't really install it until that stuff is worked out.

i really want to come back to Fedora, as to be quite honest (and forward) i pretty much despise Canonical.... I don't like how they are screwing around Gnome, and there "distatorship style of trying to run everything open-source" ie: forcing Banshee to give them profits, over the gnome-foundation, or they would be excluded from being the default music player (yes, i know they reworked the percentages for gnome, but i still don't like thier tactics). I don't like that they completely ripped off Gnome-shell for their own inteface Unity. ( i hope unity doesn't even come to Fedora )

in fact, i don't like how they treat linux-software developers in general. they except every project to fall in line with Canonical's vison and expectations ~ hell they even recently "put it on" the wine-developers to fix issues caused by Ubuntu 11.04 + Unity, when Unity is NOT evena freedesktop standard. I'm just glad the wine-devs told them they weren't going to fix the bug ~ as it wasn't a wine-bug at all. Canonical doesn't contribute enough code to open-source projects to be telling anyone what to do, or to even clain they are the leaders of the open-source community...

Admittedly, i hated gnome-shell until some of the recent changes were made to the interface). I also was starting to feel that fedora (and Redhat) were falling behind in the times. but i am happy to see that this is not the case. the only thing i am still disappointed about, as far as gnome goes ~ and i mention that because it is the default desktop for Fedora ~ is that Mutter is being used over Compiz ~ mutter is much slower, less modular, seriously lacking features, and has a total lack of granular control of it's features. No compositor for linux even touches Compiz, not Kwin or Mutter (but that is another topic). (maybe a plugin for compiz, and the right changes to gnome-shell could allow for switching the backend between mutter and compiz??)

I think Fedora 15 is headed in the right direction, so i just wanted to pay some respect to both RedHat, all of the awesome developers and Fedora contributors. The sooner i can come home to Fedora, the happier I will be.

One question though: are there any plans of having Wayland being offered at some point in Fedora??
i personally would love to use Wayland and gnome together

take care and keep up the good work.

ninez

[RahulSundaram]

Hi

"fsck will have proper btrfs support soon?"

btrfs-progs has a btrfsck program and this has limited features and is being extended. It will have the necessary support to fix any issues by the time Fedora 15 gets released

"Mutter is being used over Compiz"

Mutter is a port of Metacity to use the Clutter toolkit GNOME Shell itself is a extension to mutter window manager just like Unity is a extension of Compiz. Mutter should be on par in performance with Compiz and any real difference in speed should be reported as a bug.

There is a older snapshot of Wayland at

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/b...buildID=218205

Note that Wayland is not in a usable form and won't be for six months to an year. So all the interest in it is premature.

Rahul

just a question i need to ask, should a average user of Linux whether that being fedora or Ubuntu be using btrfs at the moment? or should one wait till btrfs is actually finished/complete before using it

[RahulSundaram]

Hi

I think you answered your own question. A more complete fsck is the only major thing as far as functionality goes and if you want to use it now, I would recommend regular backups. Meego is already using Btrfs as the default filesystem and Fedora 16 has a plan to do so as well but that is alteast six to eight months away from now.

Originally Posted by RahulSundaram

Hi

I think you answered your own question. A more complete fsck is the only major thing as far as functionality goes and if you want to use it now, I would recommend regular backups. Meego is already using Btrfs as the default filesystem and Fedora 16 has a plan to do so as well but that is alteast six to eight months away from now.

ok thankyou Rahul. i suppose i can wait till its more complete than what it is now.

[tripleninez]

"btrfs-progs has a btrfsck program and this has limited features and is being extended. It will have the necessary support to fix any issues by the time Fedora 15 gets released"

nice. Thanks for the info. that is what i was looking for!

"Mutter is a port of Metacity to use the Clutter toolkit GNOME Shell itself is a extension to mutter window manager just like Unity is a extension of Compiz. Mutter should be on par in performance with Compiz and any real difference in speed should be reported as a bug."

Yes, i am aware of what Mutter is, and well aware of the clutter toolkit. I use several applications that leverage clutter. however, mutter still lacks the powerful interface and granular control of it's configuration. Which is essentially why Compiz still is MUCH better. Mutter is still young and quite generic in what features it has. I really think it's too bad that gnome-shell wasn't built with the ability to actually allow the user to choose what compositor it uses, it's really unfortunate. I've always liked that usually I have a choice in what i can use with gnome, but now it seems the developers have decided that the user shouldn't have that choice ~ which might be a "deal-breaker" to whether or not i use gnome-shell.

"Note that Wayland is not in a usable form and won't be for six months to an year. So all the interest in it is premature."

yes and no. a year or two ago ~ when i first started reading about it / watched a lecture by it's developer on google - that was premature to show "real" interest. If it is going to be "usable" in 6months to a year than it sounds like my interest is quite warranted!

I've also used a demo of it. between the fact you can easily setup a PPA in ubuntu for it - it was really simple to take a quick look at it. But obviously, i am more interested in when Fedora will have it, not Ubuntu.

ninez

[RahulSundaram]

Hi

Mutter being a port of Metacity is designed to be simple. Configurability isn't a function of that. You can conceivably write a GNOME extension to expose whatever features you want to. Performance shouldn't be any less than Compiz. The reason behind a tight coupling of Unity to Compiz and Mutter to GNOME Shell is all because you cannot be generic and have well integrated and tested combinations at the same time. You will exponentially increase the combinations you will test and continuously fix and when you want to focus, the current method is better.

I will continue to consider the interest in Wayland to be premature. Being able to demo something doesn't put it anywhere close to the level where you can use it on a day to day basis by regular users. Not even toolkits have been ported and tested to be robust enough yet. This isn't subjective opinions. Developers working on it would tell you the same thing.

[tripleninez]

"Mutter being a port of Metacity is designed to be simple. Configurability isn't a function of that."

which is sort of lame. in my opinion, it puts the same sort of restraints on the end-user found in both OSX and Win7 GUIs... which for me, I have always preferred my linux desktops because it's usually the opposite (as in i have full-control of most aspects). it just seems like a step in the wrong direction (again, this is MY opinion).. Especially, since i have been using gnome for a long time.. but now - if in the end, mutter cannot provide the tools that i require, gnome-shell will not be used at all, which is too bad. i am quite sure i am not the only person with this opinion...

"You can conceivably write a GNOME extension to expose whatever features you want to. Performance shouldn't be any less than Compiz."

hopefully this happens, and mutter's features are both extended / exposed to end-users ~ im guessing not though. i suppose i could make some changes before compiling mutter, though. go through the source code, and modify it how i like ~ of course I still will be "limited" to what clutter / mutter provide ~ which at this point is far less than compiz, and probably will continue to be the case, well into the future. I suppose i could work on a project like this ~ but i have more important work to do, and in the end i'll just drop gnome-shell, if it can't provide the integration and functionality.

"The reason behind a tight coupling of Unity to Compiz and Mutter to GNOME Shell is all because you cannot be generic and have well integrated and tested combinations at the same time. You will exponentially increase the combinations you will test and continuously fix and when you want to focus, the current method is better."

this is only half-true. just look at how many WMs Compiz actually runs on, in a very well integrated way. Mutter nor Kwin will ever be able to say the same thing. With compiz you have a choice in how far you want to take things, how deep you want to dig and what plugins are available in your interface, and how "big" compiz actually is on your system. being modular is a good thing. Compiz can be simple as metacity, or extremely complex ~ it's the end-user's choice to decide what they want (which is my point). Mutter does not seem provide anything even close, so in my opinion ~ it "seems" inferior. it has too many limitations, from my standpoint. I'm not saying Mutter is crap (as i don't think that!), just pointing out some of it's current limitations, from a user's perspective.

"I will continue to consider the interest in Wayland to be premature. Being able to demo something doesn't put it anywhere close to the level where you can use it on a day to day basis by regular users. Not even toolkits have been ported and tested to be robust enough yet. This isn't subjective opinions. Developers working on it would tell you the same thing."

Okay, first my interest is NOT premature ~ and this is not "subjective". i fully understand that it's not ready for use. i also understand the difference between running a demo vs. actual day to day usage. (don't talk to people like they're stupid, it's insulting and is soooo rude)

Consider this, if i am interested in Wayland, then who are you or anyone else to tell me my interest is "premature"??? that is just silly, very subjective and quite short-sided... it is about the most subjective opinion, that i've heard in a while... It would be quite different if i actually believed that wayland was both ready and was equal to X11 at this point. but i know that a) it's not well supported, and b) that many toolkits aren't robust enough or ready!! - this isn't news to anyone who has been following the project...

i asked a simple question " when might me see wayland available in Fedora? " nothing more...

People talking about Wayland or eagerly waiting for it to be supported is NOT a bad thing. Most people who are excited about Wayland and showing interest is important and is a VERY good thing, and NOT premature, either ~ as long as one understands where it's at. (which as i have said, i have been following it's development (loosely) for well over a year, before any announcement by canonical, before a slew of blogs existed on the subject, thank you very much!).

i would also argue that it's disrespectful and mildy arrogant to be telling people what they should or shouldn't think. i will probably replace X11 with Wayland - when it is ready ~ so it's perfectly okay for me to be interested, and it's also fair for me to ask when i may see it included in my favorite distro.

[RahulSundaram]

Hi

"which is sort of lame. in my opinion, it puts the same sort of restraints on the end-user found in both OSX and Win7 GUIs"

Metacity has always been a simple window manager. Mutter follows the same pattern. Nothing fundamentally new. Compiz has a different approach. If you like Compiz, you will have to use a Compiz based environment. GNOME Shell is not going to change from Mutter to anything else.

"this is only half-true. just look at how many WMs Compiz actually runs on, in a very well integrated way."

Actually the integration is fairly fragile and breaks in several ways with multiple different configuration backends and so on everytime there is a major release but this is related but different to the point I was making which is that level to which Unity integrates with Compiz or GNOME shell integrates with Mutter cannot be easily swapped out.

I am certainly not telling you what to think. You seem to take insult where none is intended. Wayland is just not ready and will not be supported by any distribution for alteast six months to an year. This is a simple fact and answers precisely the question you asked. Even if it is made available in Fedora 15, it won't provide you anything useful to see. You will have to wait for Fedora 17 or so to see it replace X (not X apps however). If you consider my statement that interest in it is premature, feel free to ignore it. Doesn't change anything.

[tripleninez]

"Metacity has always been a simple window manager. Mutter follows the same pattern. Nothing fundamentally new. Compiz has a different approach. If you like Compiz, you will have to use a Compiz based environment. GNOME Shell is not going to change from Mutter to anything else."

Well, i suppose i probably (like many other people i know) won't be adopting gnome-shell. However, it is just a shell for gnome - so i suppose disabling it, is the best solution... or is the gnome-camp's plan to only allow the option of using gnome-shell? If you actually check most online reviews ~ many people are not/have not been happy with the direction gnome is taking. They are losing a lot of their user-base. it's actually quite sad. But as long as gnome doesn't force me to use Gnome-shell, i think i will continue to use gnome (hopefully). Otherwise i will be forced to use something else

"Actually the integration is fairly fragile and breaks in several ways with multiple different configuration backends and so on everytime there is a major release but this is related but different to the point I was making which is that level to which Unity integrates with Compiz or GNOME shell integrates with Mutter cannot be easily swapped out."

...and yet compiz never has broken ~ even after a distribution upgrade for me, and being used with several WMs on the same machine....? Unity being integrated with Compiz comes from the simple fact that gnome-shell had fallen extremely short in the eyes of Ubuntu/Canonical and many many users. they found Mutter limiting and slow, so they chose to not support it ~ not because of "integration". Gnome-shell integrates with Mutter as a design choice, unlike gnome - KDE integrates with Kwin ~ which can easily be swapped out / replaced with compiz - which was also a "design choice" in the KDE-camp.

But you are correct, in both cases they cannot be swapped out easily. Which is unfortunate.

"I am certainly not telling you what to think. You seem to take insult where none is intended. Wayland is just not ready and will not be supported by any distribution for alteast six months to an year. This is a simple fact and answers precisely the question you asked. Even if it is made available in Fedora 15, it won't provide you anything useful to see. You will have to wait for Fedora 17 or so to see it replace X (not X apps however). If you consider my statement that interest in it is premature, feel free to ignore it. Doesn't change anything."

Of course it's not ready for production use. But interest isn't premature ~ as long as one understands that it isn't usable yet. That being said ~ what would actually be "premature" is someone thinking they can implement it, in production. But, I wasn't implying Wayland was going to be ready for production use, for a while. I was more interested in where Fedora stood, as far as having it be available in the future. Obviously, I understand that that it does not replace X apps ~ A big design factor in Wayland is that it supports both X apps and can run Xserver (on top) ~ anyone who has read anything about Wayland knows that!!! it would never be adopted otherwise. That is common sense... You did not "precisely" answer my question, you told me my interest was premature.... there is a difference.

also, if you consider your own words that Wayland will be ready in 6months to a year, you may actually find that b4 the end of fc15's cycle ~ "in theory" it may actually be possible for someone (with some great effort) to run Wayland in a more "usable way". Although, i suspect it would require a lot of (re-)compiling / upgrading of much a Fc15 system.

but hey! most of my current Fc13 install is much more up-to-date than even Fc14. Much of fc13 has been re-compiled using the Intel XE compiler(for performance reasons), most apps/libs are built / upgraded from Git / svn / etc, and i am running a 2.6.37 kernel). Most versions are much newer, including Xorg ~ 1.9.2-git. So i don't really think anyone is really "stuck" with whatever a particular release offers, but it obviously requires some knowledge and a lot of work. We may see Walyand on Fc15 or 16 - before 17 is even in alpha... But by this i don't mean it'll be available in a repo ~ i mean someone went to the trouble, to get it working on a particular machine.

as for it "doesn't change anything"....not in your mind. But my point was (which you clearly do not understand, it would seem) is that your not in any position to be telling me or anyone else, regardless of being a Fedora contributor, as to whether or not their interest is "premature". ~ which is EXACTLY what you told me! and FYI - that IS "certainly" telling someone "how they should think!".... it is pretentious, sounds really "stuck up" with a certain level of supremacy.

the only part of wayland that is premature is in it's implementation, for production use. period.
but regardless, thank you for your input on the matter.

ninez

[RahulSundaram]

Hi

". But as long as gnome doesn't force me to use Gnome-shell, i think i will continue to use gnome (hopefully)."

gnome panel is a fallback option and will continue to exist atleast for the time being as as a option. Note that it is different from the gnome 2.x panel

" Yet compiz never has broken ~ even after a distribution upgrade for me, and being used with several WMs on the same machine....?"

I am not talking about individual experiences. Lookup the bug reports against Compiz in Fedora, upstream or other distributions if you want to see evidence of such breakage. For reference, the integration of Compiz with GNOME was via the gconf backend which is now deprecated and users upgrading to a new version will lose their settings. This is the sort of the changes which I consider problematic in Compiz.

http://lists.fedoraproject.org/piper...ry/147927.html

"Unity being integrated with Compiz comes from the simple fact that gnome-shell had fallen extremely short in the eyes of Ubuntu/Canonical"

I find this reasoning to be quite puzzling considering the lack of input from Canonical to Mutter. If they had problems, they should have communicated it to upstream developers and helped fixed it IMO. I see not much evidence of that. They have hired or contracted one of the Compiz maintainers instead. So maybe it was a control issue. *shrug* The result is that, if you want to use Unity, you will have to use Compiz. No choice there either.

", if you consider your own words that Wayland will be ready in 6months to a year, you may actually find that b4 the end of fc15's cycle ~ "in theory" it may actually be possible for someone (with some great effort) to run Wayland in a more "usable way".

Quoting myself

"Note that Wayland is not in a usable form and won't be for six months to an year. So all the interest in it is premature. "

If you understand that you can go to a great effort and still want to do so, perhaps your interest in it is not premature but that is obvious in context. No need to get hung-up on words and engage in name calling and portray it as telling people what to think. It is just my view of what it is and I understand you dislike it but I am not going to refrain from expressing it. Feel free to ignore it. Nothing more. Nothing less. Moving on.