Tails

#1 Updated by BitingBird 2015-03-26 03:53:47

• Subject changed from FAQ: why we ship GNOME (and are not going to ship somthing else) to FAQ: why we ship GNOME (and are not going to ship something else)

#2 Updated by intrigeri 2015-03-26 06:52:28

• Subject changed from FAQ: why we ship GNOME (and are not going to ship something else) to FAQ: why we ship GNOME (and are not going to ship anything else)
• Status changed from New to Confirmed

#3 Updated by BitingBird 2015-03-26 13:46:15

• Assignee set to BitingBird
• Target version set to Tails_1.4

#4 Updated by BitingBird 2015-03-27 20:22:04

• related to Feature #9076: Tails desktop environment using LXDE as base added

#5 Updated by BitingBird 2015-03-27 20:22:16

• related to Feature #9082: Tails theme (Windows 98) with LXDE window manager added

#6 Updated by BitingBird 2015-03-27 20:22:26

• related to Feature #9108: More desktop environments added

#7 Updated by BitingBird 2015-03-27 20:31:34

• Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
• Feature Branch set to bitingbird:faq/9111-gnome

#8 Updated by BitingBird 2015-03-27 20:34:35

• Assignee changed from BitingBird to sajolida
• QA Check set to Ready for QA

new FAQ entry, with TOC, built and looks good - please review and merge :)

#9 Updated by intrigeri 2015-04-04 11:38:20

• Assignee changed from sajolida to BitingBird
• % Done changed from 0 to 30
• QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Dev Needed

Great idea, indeed that’s a FAQ. Here are a few comments:

• The “staying close to Debian” argument might have been true historically (honestly, I’m not even sure: 5y ago, GNOME simply was the only modern desktop that integrated everything nicely), but even if Debian had moved to XFCE as the default desktop environment (DE) for Jessie (that was a close one), I doubt we would have switched as well. So I think we should just drop this one.
• I would mention accessibility as a strong point of GNOME. Even if GNOME 3 has introduced some regressions in this area initially, and there’s quite some room for improvement, it’s still one of the best in class: https://wiki.debian.org/DebianDesktop/Requalification/Jessie.
• GNOME evolves fast enough to keep on top of the foundations that a modern Linux DE is based upon (UDisks, polkit, logind, etc.), and on top of hardware technologies (e.g. HiDPI, touch devices) — this is not the case for every other major DE, at all. In that sense, GNOME is comparatively a future-proof choice.
• Regarding the “bugs are corrected” argument, I must say it’s borderline bullshit. That’s mainly true for critical bugs, or bugs that affect customers of the company that’s funding a lot of GNOME development, or… when you attach a patch and wait.
• I would add the fact that GNOME has a strong maintenance team in Debian and Ubuntu (these teams are actually working very much hand-in-hand).
• I would add that we’re conscious of some drawbacks GNOME has (more specifically, we could mention that it’s resource-hungry).
• I would also add that we can’t realistically support more than one DE, since quite often people ask not for replacing GNOME, but for supporting another DE as a bonus (much alike adding a 64-bit or ARM ISO, etc.). This might change in the future, but we’re not there yet.
• We have invested quite a lot in getting GNOME expertise, and a move to a new DE would eat lots of our time. Unsurprisingly, we have lots of more important things to do, even if we wanted to migrate.

#10 Updated by BitingBird 2015-04-04 14:27:28

• Assignee changed from BitingBird to intrigeri
• QA Check changed from Dev Needed to Ready for QA

Reworked it all, I think the new version is quite good. I integrated most of your remarks, but in more synthetic form (we don’t want to drawn users in technical details :)).

Please review again :)

#11 Updated by intrigeri 2015-04-06 09:23:46

• Assignee changed from intrigeri to BitingBird
• % Done changed from 30 to 40
• QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Dev Needed

Yay, better! Here are a few more minor bugs to be fixed before we pass the ball to sajolida:

• I don’t think that “why we limit the software included in Tails” is what you mean. Perhaps “why we limit the amount of software included in Tails” instead?
• There’s at least one typography mistake (space before “;”).
• The style guide we’re following recommends not using contractions such as it’s.
• “see below” isn’t very future proof, and IMO “below” simply isn’t needed since what follows is a link to what you’re referring to :)

#12 Updated by BitingBird 2015-04-06 23:56:06

• Assignee changed from BitingBird to sajolida
• QA Check changed from Dev Needed to Ready for QA

Reworked as asked, please review :)

#13 Updated by BitingBird 2015-04-11 16:07:14

• Priority changed from Normal to Elevated

Setting priority elevated, as it’s already been reviewed by intri and the final review could probabaly be quick

#14 Updated by sajolida 2015-04-24 08:28:24

• Status changed from In Progress to Resolved
• % Done changed from 40 to 100

Applied in changeset commit:2ab0b1de401d1783f009146315218f99bc89614c.

#15 Updated by sajolida 2015-04-24 08:40:06

• QA Check deleted (Ready for QA)
• Feature Branch changed from bitingbird:faq/9111-gnome to faq/9111-gnome

Merged, thanks!