Lumina Desktop 0.9 Adds Window Compositing Support, New Text Editor

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Lumina Desktop 0.9 Adds Window Compositing Support, New Text Editor

The BSD-focused Lumina Desktop Environment has released version 0.9 of their open-source, Qt-powered desktop while version 1.0 is expected later this year in step with PC-BSD/FreeBSD 11.0...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Lumina-Desktop-0.9

[Awesomeness]

Oh, wow. Well, at least it's BSD licensed and does not fall under the evil GPL, right...?

[M1kkko]

Oh, wow. Well, at least it's BSD licensed and does not fall under the evil GPL, right...?

Where's the GPL in that picture? Or what is your point?

[raster]

Oh, wow. Well, at least it's BSD licensed and does not fall under the evil GPL, right...?

if you're that much against GPL ... perhaps you should check the license for Qt ... which Lumina depends on (without which it can't work). You might get yourself a bit of a shock. what's the point of avoiding the "evil" GPL if the dependencies of it are fully ensconced in it. unless of course you wish to pay for the commercial license...

[rhavenn]

if you're that much against GPL ... perhaps you should check the license for Qt ... which Lumina depends on (without which it can't work). You might get yourself a bit of a shock. what's the point of avoiding the "evil" GPL if the dependencies of it are fully ensconced in it. unless of course you wish to pay for the commercial license...

Qt is LGPL or commercial. So, while still having GPL in its name, it is a totally different beast than GPLv2 or GPLv3 when it comes to licensing and what you can or can't do with it.

[ermo]

Where's the GPL in that picture? Or what is your point?

I don't wish to take anything away from the accomplishment that is the lumina desktop, but if I were to guess, he's probably suggesting that the, erhm, "graphical experience" is more "programmer art" than "renaissance aesthetical masterpiece" ?

If you look at the amount of polish and design work that has gone into e.g. the KDE and GNOME default themes over the past many years, I'm sure you'll spot the difference.

Again, not here to bash the lumina desktop -- just offering an observation.

[uid313]

Yeah, but does it run on Linux?

[raster]

Qt is LGPL or commercial. So, while still having GPL in its name, it is a totally different beast than GPLv2 or GPLv3 when it comes to licensing and what you can or can't do with it.

then explain why someone would worry about GPL for what is not a general toolkit library but a set of applications - as binaries the GPL boundary stops there and doesn't spread further (as opposed to LGPL). if lumina were a library/toolkit ... then it might make sense. well ok to be pedantically correct - lumina does ship with a shared library, but it very much looks like it's intended just to share code between it's own tools. it can be used outside but searching around i can't seem to find anything that does outside of lumina itself). it's really just a small suite of qt based tools (fm, screenshotter, config tool, search tool, ...), so i was reading into GPL, it meaning *GPL (GPL, LGPL, etc.) as it didn't make a lot of sense otherwise. i have spoken with enough people who think *GPL is evil and BSD license is so much better and they want to keep a *GPL free system because of this belief etc. and the moment someone says "GPL is evil" for a project that is really a set of binaries, i can't help but think it's another one of these people. and so i thought they might be surprised that their *GPL-free system is not so *GPL-free if they need Qt.

[Guest]

i have spoken with enough people who think *GPL is evil and BSD license is so much better and they want to keep a *GPL free system because of this belief etc.

They should change their beliefs I think. They're stupid. The bsd license is probably the most idiotic one. It supports competition and proprietary licenses, but doesn't protect the code in any way. It's a one way street.

[DanL]

I don't wish to take anything away from the accomplishment that is the lumina desktop, but if I were to guess, he's probably suggesting that the, erhm, "graphical experience" is more "programmer art" than "renaissance aesthetical masterpiece"

I disagree with your conclusion. The posted screenshot doesn't show the desktop really well. It mainly shows the icon/theming used on the screenshot app. It also seems to be totally unrelated to the text in that post (talking about licensing).

Also, even if the theming for Lumina is unpolished and/or limited in choice right now, that's probably a low priority for devs and current users.