Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 33

Thread: Consort Desktop: A New Fork Of GNOME Classic

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,829

    Default Consort Desktop: A New Fork Of GNOME Classic

    Phoronix: Consort Desktop: A New Fork Of GNOME Classic

    The Debian-powered SolusOS Linux distribution has forked GNOME Classic into the Consort Desktop Environment...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI3NzM

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    [Why another fork?] Mainly to protect the users of our desktop components. Pinning patched packages higher than underlying packages proves far too tricky. The amount of patches in each mentioned component qualifies fork-status anyway, so it was time to admit it.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI3NzM
    Really? I don't see a reason not to collaborate with Mate or Cinnamon. Or am I missing something here? What are the Mate and Cinnamon projects doing which is not liked by SolusOS?

    EDIT: I figured it out from the comments made in the blogpost annoucing this decision.

    Mate is based on 'dead technology' and a 'complete fork of GNOME2' yet 'incompatible with GNOME itself(!)'. Consort only forks the fallback parts.

    Cinnamon is 'is still a fallback session for a fork of a 3D environment using software rendering'. What is that supposed to mean?

    EDIT2: After reading all of this, why not go with XFCE already? lol
    Last edited by Rexilion; 01-17-2013 at 11:13 AM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Creve Coeur, Missouri
    Posts
    399

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    Really? I don't see a reason not to collaborate with Mate or Cinnamon. Or am I missing something here? What are the Mate and Cinnamon projects doing which is not liked by SolusOS?

    EDIT: I figured it out from the comments made in the blogpost annoucing this decision.

    Mate is based on 'dead technology' and a 'complete fork of GNOME2' yet 'incompatible with GNOME itself(!)'. Consort only forks the fallback parts.

    Cinnamon is 'is still a fallback session for a fork of a 3D environment using software rendering'. What is that supposed to mean?

    EDIT2: After reading all of this, why not go with XFCE already? lol
    Because not everyone likes or wants XFCE. I mean, it misses features that I'd miss. IMO, Gnome's fallback session is probably the best desktop environment I have ever used.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Basement
    Posts
    389

    Default

    So another clown squad decided to grow neckbeards and humiliate themselves. Did they contact upstream to ask for maintainership or how to proceed forward? No. They say upstream is dead that is not quite true. Increasingly inactive yes but the infrastructure is working and a lot of people keeps an eye on the code.

    Forking is taking over complete responsibility which these havent shown at upstream. This is just a bunch of lame ass forksters having a few minutes of fame.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by funkSTAR View Post
    So another clown squad decided to grow neckbeards and humiliate themselves. Did they contact upstream to ask for maintainership or how to proceed forward? No. They say upstream is dead that is not quite true. Increasingly inactive yes but the infrastructure is working and a lot of people keeps an eye on the code.

    Forking is taking over complete responsibility which these havent shown at upstream. This is just a bunch of lame ass forksters having a few minutes of fame.
    Funky, how many versions do you GNOMErs have? It's hard to keep count: GNOME Shell, Unity, Mate, Cinamon, Consort.

    Wouldn't it make more sense to simply return the few options people want and need (2d desktop, classic shell...) to the official version instead of having this mess? People fork because users are being ignored, and the official version is already a minority compared to the forks.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    313

    Default

    I'm reading between the lines, that they'll port gnome-panel to GTK+3, or am I mistaken? That would justify a fork.

    Edit:
    Removed comment about Mate
    Last edited by oleid; 01-17-2013 at 11:41 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oleid View Post
    I'm reading between the lines, that they'll port gnome-panel to GTK+3, or am I mistaken? That would justify a fork.
    If I understand correctly, they are a fork of GNOME3 which looks like GNOME2, but without needing OpenGL like Cinamon.

    So:

    GNOME Shell = new default
    Unity = diseased clusterfuck
    Mate = GNOME 2
    Cinamon = GNOME 3 with a GNOME 2 theme, requires OpenGL
    Consort = GNOME 3 with a GNOME 2 theme, does not require OpenGL

    To me, it seems like allowing a fallback path without OpenGL, and maintaining a fallback shell which mimics GNOME 2 would have made all of these forks unnecessary. Except Unity.

    I guess that some people in charge thought that the current situation would be better.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    If I understand correctly, they are a fork of GNOME3 which looks like GNOME2, but without needing OpenGL like Cinamon.
    You're right! And I need more tea That makes even more sense^^

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    492

    Default

    I see it as a natural reaction to GNOME specialization towards a certain group, the ones who share their "vision". The forks are just filling the vacuum left. Evolution at work. :P

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,053

    Default Difference of MATE

    What is the difference between Consort Desktop and MATE?

Posting Permissions

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