:: Re: [dyne:bolic] Dynebolic default …
Top Page
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Author: Holger Beetz
To: dynebolic mailinglist
Subject: Re: [dyne:bolic] Dynebolic default WM
Being a long-time Gnome2 user myself I am somewhat separated about the
choice of this VM for dyne3.

Gnome2 is still used by Debian Stable and Ubuntu 10.04 but is it
really a good choice for the future ?
With all this Unity / Gnome 3 mess lately I switched away to XFCE /
Xubuntu. XFCE shares identical gtk dependencies but this also means
you can run a lot of Gnome2 tools without issues under XFCE.

For me Gnome2 is a dead-end and I rather like to see XFCE.

If dyne:bolic is Debian-based it might be a worthwhile idea to let the
end user choose between different desktop environments (e.g LXDE,
XFCE, GNOME2, Enlightment).

As default windows manager (in Live CD mode) I'd rather choose one
which can be considered future safe rather than a legacy one.

Just my two cents,

2011/11/8 dreamer <dreamer@???>:
> Cool. I have the beta in a VM already, but only the dvd-image.
> Any idea how we can work on this?
> I'd like to help tweak some things to make lxde true to dyne:bolic :)
> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:58 PM, Luis Cabarcas <cmdr.chili@???> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 9:35 AM, dreamer <dreamer@???> wrote:
>> > So, on IRC I was talking about this with Jaromil a bit and I'm wondering
>> > what others' ideas are.
>> >
>> > In previous versions dyne:bolic was always focused on running on as many
>> > systems as possible.
>> > Now with the latest beta showing the full OS does not even fit on a
>> single
>> > CD anymore, we also see a shift from the previous XFCE (which at the time
>> > was quite novel) to a GNOME desktop.
>> >
>> > To me both these developments seem to counter the spirit of dyne:bolic.
>> Now
>> > Jaromil explained that the beta is full-featured and therefor too big
>> for a
>> > CD and that eventually there will be an installation to add modules
>> later.
>> > But, on the topic of WM perhaps it's nice to discuss a bit the
>> > possibilities.
>> >
>> > Personally I think XFCE has grown out of it's box and is quite a big DE.
>> > Similar to GNOME perhaps, but in a way more suitable for small children
>> for
>> > instance (nice big buttons and relatively easy menus).
>> > A DE I've been looking at some time is LXDE, which is based on openbox.
>> It
>> > is very minimal and can be easily tweaked (theme, menu, default apps
>> etc.)
>> > to suit ones own needs.
>> > It gives all the basic DE features, looks very nice and clean, has a very
>> > small footprint on the hardware and not any intrusive integrations
>> (unlike
>> > other DE's like GNOME and XFCE that depend greatly on their own specific
>> > configurations etc.).
>> >
>> > So what are your ideas of getting a dyne-config for LXDE and use this for
>> > the final dyne:bolic 3.0 release?
>> > I think it would be very well suited for the distribution.
>> >
>> > greets,
>> > Alexander
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > dynebolic mailing list
>> > dynebolic@???
>> > http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/dynebolic
>> >
>> Very good idea actually gtk dependency its common with gnome, but taking
>> LXDE would mean a lot less weight put into the install media.
>> I'll start working on it  as soon as I get home and install the beta in a
>> VM.
>> German C.
>> _______________________________________________
>> dynebolic mailing list
>> dynebolic@???
>> http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/dynebolic
> _______________________________________________
> dynebolic mailing list
> dynebolic@???
> http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/dynebolic