Ugh, the anti-GNOME circlejerk here is utterly ridiculous. For one, all of you rage over a whole bunch of "mandatory" features that really any half-wit with two minutes of Gnome Tweak Tool and DConf Editor usage could solve. Sure, is it placed directly in Control Panel? No. But to say that this is all just a bunch of crap that's forced down your throats when, in most cases, there's a little bit of tweaking involved is simply lazy.
And they also gave them the ability to toggle that feature within DConf Editor: org.gnome.settings-daemon.plugins.power.Quote:
Originally Posted by elipsey
"But installing things is SOOOO much work. I hate having to customize."
Then what did you get Linux for again?
Okay, so I tried this out and found that you are correct here (with respect to not adhering to "lock after" in system settings). However, this does work when set to "lock after screen turns off," which is a small problem, but not necessarily one that can't be overcome by simply adjusting screen blanking time. And those who think it's somehow unreasonable to have a shell that performs screen lock only after the screen has shut off (we're not talking about suspend/hibernate here) perhaps would be equally as interested in complaining about the Common Cold and gas prices.Quote:
Originally Posted by bwat47
Ah sure, you're right. Who needs suggestions? FORK ALL THE CODE!Quote:
Originally Posted by bwat47
Uh, Mutter is the compositor, Gnome Shell is the window manager/desktop, and Nautilus can also act as a desktop side-by-side Gnome Shell. But it's such a shame that we couldn't segment GNOME into 500 other components so that there are even more lovely dependencies on install time. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by schmalzler
Running gnom3-session does NOT start mutter. Why? gnome-shell links against libmutter and uses functionality exposed in the lib for managing windows + compositing.
BUT: all in one fucking process! Make the shell (I mean desktop) hang and you won't be able to manage windows anymore. Same goes for the compositor (though it makes sense to have compositing functionality in the window manager).
And now gnome-shell will BE (not just start...) the screensaver. Making one procees responsible for so many different tasks is no good design :/
And I totally agree, a single process doing everything isn't that good .. I don't get why they did that. There's certainly no reason it would cut down on dependencies or something. Probably it makes debugging more difficult too.(Every crash will be the Gnome Shell process)
Really this is just one more questionable design decision on their part in a long list of questionable design decisions, including the aforementioned registry (which even Microsoft admits was a bad idea because .NET uses XML configs not the registry). The only question is when they're going to wake up and realize the mess they're in, I would hope that it's before they come to a screeching halt not really being able to develop further because of it.
That design aspect of Gnome Shell has always puzzled me too. I've always found it quite easy to crash because if you trip it up in one area, the whole thing can go down before you can blink.
I hope they consider a minor technical re-design at some point.