Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 159

Thread: GNOME Playing Around With New Middle-Click Action

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bordeaux, France
    Posts
    213

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dee. View Post
    I never use the middle button for pasting... and I don't use Gnome 3. Why would I care about this topic? Well, I don't. Bye!
    I must admit I have always been sheerly impressed by people who read a news about a thing they don't care, and then have the courage to rant in the forums.

    I mean, when a news doesn't interest me, I generally don't even take the time to finish reading it, let alone going through the hassle of logging in, and typing a message only to say that I didn't found it to be interesting / relevant... Amazing.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    135

    Default

    IMHO the most important question would be: How will applications behave, that rely on middle-click-paste? E.g. urxvt. If simply highlighting text won't copy it to the clipboard you won't be able to paste text in urxvt. People (like me) who think gnome-terminal (and vte in general) is slow and buggy won't be able to use alternative terminals.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    192

    Default

    Before everyone goes ballistic I think you should take note of the text of the commit that reverted the change
    We're not really ready for this change, and we haven't
    messaged it properly. After discussion with Allan Day and
    Jakup Steiner, we'll defer this change until the next cycle.
    So I suggest everyone drops a few DEFCON levels and wait until we know what the idea is. Because right now there is basically no information at all.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LinuxGamer View Post
    The Fail Boat is why we have the MATE Desktop
    There is no real reason to use MATE, it's more of a legacy thing, because it uses obsolete technologies and is slower than Xfce.

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Calinou View Post
    There is no real reason to use MATE, it's more of a legacy thing, because it uses obsolete technologies and is slower than Xfce.
    MATE is a more featurefull desktop than XFCE. XFCE was always the lightweight alternative to GNOME.

    Last I heard was that XFCE are sticking with the obsolete GTK2, where as MATE are migrating to GTK3. MATE have already removed most of the old deprecated GNOME libraries.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,752

    Default

    Dear Gnome, and the retarded designers who hate users, fuck you. Enough said.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,188

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by doom_Oo7 View Post
    I must admit I have always been sheerly impressed by people who read a news about a thing they don't care, and then have the courage to rant in the forums.
    That's just the phoronix forum team of "expert" analysts. They always give their objective, unbiased commentary on everything just for our benefit! Through their efforts to extinguish the flames of ignorance, I've learned to hate Gnome, Mono, AMD graphics, Ubuntu, Mir, Nvidia, emacs, etc.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwat47 View Post
    Gnome 3 is not "less customizable" than gnome 2. It does have less built in preferences, but it is designed in a way that actually makes it far more customizable than gnome 2 due to its support for extensions. People tend to greatly exaggerate gnome 3's "lack of customization".

    The most important "missing options" are available in gnome-tweak-tool (such as font settings). I agree font settings should be available somewhere in the normal preferences, but its silly how some people totally disregard the tweak tool because its not the "regular preferences" or such similar silly arguments.
    Those lack of customization ones are extremely good arguments. If it's not configurable by default, it's not configurable by the majority.

    Gnome Tweak Tool, a GUI for their registry, is barely better than Regedit for Windows. Requiring a third-party tool to provide options that should've been configurable in the main package is terrible.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    192

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    Gnome Tweak Tool, a GUI for their registry, is barely better than Regedit for Windows. Requiring a third-party tool to provide options that should've been configurable in the main package is terrible.
    If you think gnome-tweak-tool and regedit have something in common, then I am assuming that you have never used it. It is basically an "advanced options" app. It is also not a third-party tool.
    Feel free to argue that some options belong in the "basic" options (lacking a better word), because I think there are a few cases as well, but you could perhaps at least try to avoid being totally misleading?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,752

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kigurai View Post
    If you think gnome-tweak-tool and regedit have something in common, then I am assuming that you have never used it. It is basically an "advanced options" app. It is also not a third-party tool.
    Feel free to argue that some options belong in the "basic" options (lacking a better word), because I think there are a few cases as well, but you could perhaps at least try to avoid being totally misleading?
    If you take a look at what gnome-tweak-tool does, it changes Gnome's registry. This makes it in function similar to regedit.

    I know it's not dconf-editor but looks more like a settings panel. That doesn't change the fact its choices change Gnome registry.

Posting Permissions

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