Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 39

Thread: Compiz Is Likely To Get The Boot From Fedora 17

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,345

    Default

    i haven't tried compiz in maybe a little over 2 years, but it seemed pretty stable to me back then and had a lot of features. i'm sure within that time, it has been improved. is fedora seriously just ditching it because nobody is maintaining it anymore? because maybe theres just nothing to maintain. so for example suppose the linux kernel's development slows down to almost a complete halt for months. are they going to remove it? unless compiz is proving to be a problem, removing something because its orphaned is an incredibly stupid motive.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    i haven't tried compiz in maybe a little over 2 years, but it seemed pretty stable to me back then and had a lot of features. i'm sure within that time, it has been improved. is fedora seriously just ditching it because nobody is maintaining it anymore? because maybe theres just nothing to maintain. so for example suppose the linux kernel's development slows down to almost a complete halt for months. are they going to remove it? unless compiz is proving to be a problem, removing something because its orphaned is an incredibly stupid motive.
    What would be even more stupid would be keeping a package which does not work as no one would bother making it continue to function on a changing software ecosystem with changing and updating libraries. Which Fedora definitely is.

    Think about what you are saying.

    Actually, what I am more surprised about is that AWN may be getting the boot, as a lot of people are using that in conjunction with Gnome Shell.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    55

    Default

    Ok, this is getting crazy.

    Compiz has quite a lot of nice functionality which is NOT available in other window managers. Why remove it?

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    60

    Default

    Fedora have never been really good at supporting WM other than Gnome. Their KDE4 version was a mess early on (better now) and they don't package many advanced WMs like Awesome and Gnome2. This is not a surprise.

    As for Unity, I tried to port it to Gentoo in the early day of the 2D version and I can totally confirm. It wont run unless they use mainstream API. Even the 2D version had over 30 custom dependencies. They even ported part of Gnome2 to Qt ?!?. Yea, I am not kidding, they really did. It is a mess.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    593

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cyberax View Post
    Why remove it?
    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix.com
    The package retiring comes from packages that no longer build against the current state of Fedora and/or are orphaned by meaning they no longer have an appropriate (active) package maintainer. All of the Compiz packages have been orphaned (meaning there's no maintainer) and so as such they are likely to be stripped away in the next week if no one picks them up. The retirement list for Fedora 17 has been floating around since last month and no one's been interested in Compiz yet.
    It shouldn't be that hard to read/understand. You can't have applications in repositories that do not compile and solving such issues can take time. Now the problem here is that there is no maintaner so who do you think is going to do the work of first fixing the issue, then compiling, then testing and furthermore maintain the package till someone else picks it up? The reason why it's being removed is because there's no one to do the work.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    244

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teho View Post
    It shouldn't be that hard to read/understand. You can't have applications in repositories that do not compile and solving such issues can take time. Now the problem here is that there is no maintaner so who do you think is going to do the work of first fixing the issue, then compiling, then testing and furthermore maintain the package till someone else picks it up? The reason why it's being removed is because there's no one to do the work.
    Exactly, there's no ideological stance behind its removal, if someone is willing to step in and fix it, it will stay.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,030

    Default

    And if you all are really that upset you could just volunteer to maintain it yourself...

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    983

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    i haven't tried compiz in maybe a little over 2 years, but it seemed pretty stable to me back then and had a lot of features. i'm sure within that time, it has been improved. is fedora seriously just ditching it because nobody is maintaining it anymore? because maybe theres just nothing to maintain. so for example suppose the linux kernel's development slows down to almost a complete halt for months. are they going to remove it? unless compiz is proving to be a problem, removing something because its orphaned is an incredibly stupid motive.
    You seem confused. I'm pretty sure that they are talking about a lack of _package maintainers_ not lack of an upstream maintainer. Sometimes the two are the same, but usually not.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,345

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whizse View Post
    You seem confused. I'm pretty sure that they are talking about a lack of _package maintainers_ not lack of an upstream maintainer. Sometimes the two are the same, but usually not.

    ya that would make a lot more sense.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    714

    Default

    One of the advantages to Fedora versus Ubuntu/Debian/Suse/etc etc... is that it's really easy to get involved.

    It's designed as a play ground for Linux folks. This is why it is the first to pick up on things like SystemD and is willing to make fairly drastic changes to it's infrastructure.

    While it's a testbed for Redhat developers, it still can be largely controlled by anybody who is willing to put the work into it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •