OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/23614/GNOME_3_0_Delayed_to_March_2011 Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2013, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Fri, 24 May 2013 09:11:27 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434728 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434728 I would rather them take their time and get it right, than rush it to meet a deadline. Take your time guys, we'll wait. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:00:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (poundsmack) Comments RE: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434729 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434729 Precisely. Let's not have another Gnome 2.0/KDE 4 disaster. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (orestes) Comments RE[2]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434731 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434731 Gnome 1.0 was also rather rough at the edges, though the error messages were occasionally quite funny. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:26:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (dylansmrjones) Comments Right decision to delay http://www.osnews.com/thread?434733 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434733 But I think the decision to release a 2.32 is a mistake, instead they should have released a bugfix release of 2.30 and focused on fixing a great public Beta of 3.0 in September, so both users and developer could help test/port/evaluate the new desktop and its new API's before it's release in March. One should remember that after Gnome 3 is released, it will be nearly impossible to change API's, so the more programs is ported to the new API's during the Beta stage, the more is the systems design can be tested and refined before the final 3.0 Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:39:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Toad) Comments RE[2]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434734 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434734 I don't know how you think that's going to be prevented. When you look at other desktops like KDE, but mainly Windows and OS X, Gnome 3 has a very, very long way to go before it gets up to those standards. A new shell isn't really going to cut it. That's simply going to be a painful process of release early and release often, as is normal in the open source world, until it stabilises.

Personally, I think March 2011 is pretty optimistic and if they manage to release something finished then then it probably won't be good enough. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (segedunum) Comments RE[3]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434741 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434741 Simple. Don't slap a .0 tag on what amounts to alpha software and expect unsuspecting end users to test it. Continue to recommend distros ship 2.x as the default till it stabilizes and fully support that branch. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (orestes) Comments RE[2]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434749 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434749 People are already calling it a disaster and they did the same with KDE4. In my view, GNOME Shell is very stable and if it does crash, it drops back to GNOME 2 gracefully.

Novell have implemented it very nicely into openSUSE 11.3 with it's own session. I'm currently working on a GNOME Shell Sonar theme (The default GTK theme in openSUSE), which is nice because it uses CCS3 and SVG elements.

I think GNOME Shell is rather innovative but it takes some getting used to because of the different workflow.Edited 2010-07-29 19:22 UTC Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:20:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (SlackerJack) Comments RE: Right decision to delay http://www.osnews.com/thread?434765 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434765
One should remember that after Gnome 3 is released, it will be nearly impossible to change API's, so the more programs is ported to the new API's during the Beta stage, the more is the systems design can be tested and refined before the final 3.0


Irrelevant, because that porting is already happening, and has been for years. Most of the "new APIs" are things that have been gradually added to 2.x over the past few years, and much of the actual Gnome 3 porting effort is in getting applications to stop using old APIs that 3.x is dropping.

Well written 2.x apps and libraries can be ported to 3.x just by running a search/replace over their Makefile, no code changes required. Some of them are even doing that during the transition, able to pick one or the other at build time. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Delgarde) Comments RE[4]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434768 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434768 You do remember KDE4 being released while they tried to tell everyone it was beta? Nobody cares if it's not ready yet, it was big new and shiny.

Something happened to me as a Linux user when i switched completely. When software gets a new release i want it. I'll sit on my PC all night if it doesn't work because for some reason I have to have it.

That's why delay is good, keep it away from the ravenous compilers who also complain the most when something isn't that great. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (stabbyjones) Comments RE[5]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434769 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434769 You do have a point, more than a few distros played a pretty big part in the KDE 4 situation pushing the new shiny code out as default before it was ready. To that end, we can only hope they'll be more responsible this time.

But... the KDE team also made the brilliant move of trying to redefine decades of accepted standards of what a .0 release was.

I'm not saying keep it away from the early adopters who are used to having things break and enjoy it, but for the love of $DEITY don't make it default so that Johnny New User's first impression of Linux is a pretty but half working system Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (orestes) Comments bummer http://www.osnews.com/thread?434774 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434774 "volunteer labor" ? You can just pay 1$/day for indian guys or chinese to get it done faster but who cares. F*ck gnome and kde and DBUS, gunna use fluxbox in 2040 too. Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (xaeropower) Comments RE[4]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434790 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434790 Ah, you mean like how KDE recommended distros to continue ship 3.x until 4 had stabilized? Funny how so few distros listened to that and yet it all ended up being KDE's fault. Fri, 30 Jul 2010 05:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Soulbender) Comments RE[2]: Right decision to delay http://www.osnews.com/thread?434795 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434795
Irrelevant, because that porting is already happening, and has been for years. Most of the "new APIs" are things that have been gradually added to 2.x over the past few years, and much of the actual Gnome 3 porting effort is in getting applications to stop using old APIs that 3.x is dropping.

I now that, much of Gnome 3.0 is to remove legacy stuf (bonobo,gconf,exposing internal structure in gtk, theme engine...). But does for example dConf or new theme engine support the need of all application? How many application does access internal structures in gtk in their own legacy code, and does gtk+ 3.0 api let them do what these 2.0 application need it to do? The new theming engine with CSS support, how well is it tested?


Well written 2.x apps and libraries can be ported to 3.x just by running a search/replace over their Makefile, no code changes required. Some of them are even doing that during the transition, able to pick one or the other at build time.


I am well aware of this, but how many "bad" written 2.x apps exist? They will need to be ported/rewritten also. Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Toad) Comments Cough http://www.osnews.com/thread?434806 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434806
We could release in September and have something working that is okayish


Like KDE4? ;)

Instead of delaying a couple of months, and getting the product out as soon as possible, as would be done with any commercial software, they decided to stick to their regular schedule, skip a release, and spend the extra time on testing and polishing up the featureset.


This is ridiculous hypocrasy. There have been plenty of GNOME (as well as other open source software projects) releases that have been underdone. There have also been plenty of commercial software programs released that are definitely NOT underdone.

Disclaimer for trolls and people that can't help but get emotional over logical criticism: I am no GNOME or KDE advocate (I like both). I also support open source software. I DO NOT like the constant theme of releasing underdone software which seems to be particulrly common in the open source world (not that it doesn't happen in commercial software, just that it seems to happen less frequently).

So, hopefully GNOME fulfills its promise and a "finished" version is released!Edited 2010-07-30 09:09 UTC Fri, 30 Jul 2010 09:09:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Aragorn992) Comments Good http://www.osnews.com/thread?434810 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434810 I'm glad they are delaying it. I'm not ready to give up GNOME 2 yet. I'm happy with the way things are and GNOME 3 is going to seriously screw up my current work flow. Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (abraxas) Comments Comment by antwarrior http://www.osnews.com/thread?434819 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434819 I can't wait until March 2011. Sorry. I should say, I can not wait. I am over 30 now and rather do something else than spend the rest of my life waiting for software to be released.

I avoided KDE4 because it was new and required a commitment and tinkering so I stuck with Gnome waiting for their next version upgrade. But March 2011 is too far so tonight, I install KDE 4.x and cross my fingers hoping that Gnome 3.0 won't make want to change again. ;) Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (antwarrior) Comments RE[3]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434832 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434832
When you look at other desktops like KDE, but mainly Windows and OS X, Gnome 3 has a very, very long way to go before it gets up to those standards.

I think you're full of Shell on that one! Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (fretinator) Comments RE[4]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434841 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434841
Simple. Don't slap a .0 tag on what amounts to alpha software and expect unsuspecting end users to test it.

That is open source I'm afraid. Developers get to decide when they want to release something otherwise you have something like Debian - it drifts on for years. If it isn't good enough then distributions shouldn't ship it, or ship it as a development option at install.

Continue to recommend distros ship 2.x as the default till it stabilizes and fully support that branch.

That's exactly what KDE did do - and it was totally, utterly and completely ignored. That's a problem for the distributions, and one that they have generally failed utterly and miserably at. They ship anything that is >= *.0 and then whine when the bug reports come in.Edited 2010-07-30 17:23 UTC Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (segedunum) Comments RE[6]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434843 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434843
But... the KDE team also made the brilliant move of trying to redefine decades of accepted standards of what a .0 release was.

Nope, it's the same as it's always been. Just as Gnome 2.0 was and PulseAudio 0.** whatever is. Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:25:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (segedunum) Comments RE[2]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?434847 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434847
Precisely. Let's not have another Gnome 2.0/KDE 4 disaster.


It's not like Apple managed to do much better with the first release of Mac OS X That definitely had it's flaws. Fri, 30 Jul 2010 19:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Stephen!) Comments The Simple Solution - both http://www.osnews.com/thread?434864 http://www.osnews.com/thread?434864 Seems to me that the solution to this is so simple I don't know why it hasn't hit everyone over the head. I enjoy playing with alpha and beta software, and I'm currently running Firefox4-beta2 and Google-Chrome-dev (without issues, I may add). I also expect to install Ubuntu Maverick-alpha3 next week when it's released (on a Btrfs partition!).

Any good reason why I can't install both Gnome2 and Gnome3 and choose at login time which one I care to use? At least with Ubuntu, it's very easy to choose which desktop I want at login time, and most distros are similar (granted, some distros do make that difficult).

Seems to me like the best of both worlds. I can choose stable or unstable whenever I login, depending on my whim at the moment. Because Gnome3 is not currently available in the Ubuntu repository, it's not accessible to me right now (unless I want to compile from source, which I don't). Making the binaries available would get more people experimenting with it, and help speed development along.

But yes, Gnome3 should be clearly marked "beta" or even "alpha" so as to eliminate any confusion with the stable Gnome2. That whole KDE4.0 fiasco should not be repeated. So Ubuntu developers (if you're reading this) - go ahead and hit me with Gnome3.0-beta1 - I'm ready!Edited 2010-07-31 03:54 UTC Sat, 31 Jul 2010 03:46:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ozonehole) Comments RE[4]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?435107 http://www.osnews.com/thread?435107
Simple. Don't slap a .0 tag on what amounts to alpha software and expect unsuspecting end users to test it. Continue to recommend distros ship 2.x as the default till it stabilizes and fully support that branch.

That's exactly what the KDE team did and, though KDE4.0 was labelled as a ".0", it was very clearly distributed as BETA.

The problem wasn't KDE being released too early, it was impatient users ignoring the warnings and expecting release quality from beta software.

Heck, even the KDE distros weren't offering KDE4.0 ISOs as the download - users had to specifically choose KDE4.0 and read through the warnings before downloading. Mon, 02 Aug 2010 17:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Laurence) Comments RE[6]: This is a good thing http://www.osnews.com/thread?435108 http://www.osnews.com/thread?435108
You do have a point, more than a few distros played a pretty big part in the KDE 4 situation pushing the new shiny code out as default before it was ready. To that end, we can only hope they'll be more responsible this time.

But... the KDE team also made the brilliant move of trying to redefine decades of accepted standards of what a .0 release was.

I'm not saying keep it away from the early adopters who are used to having things break and enjoy it, but for the love of $DEITY don't make it default so that Johnny New User's first impression of Linux is a pretty but half working system


KDE4.0 wasn't even default on Kubuntu let alone any other Linux distro. It was a seperate downloadable ISO for people who wanted to beta test.

The problem was people were impatient - went out of their way to run beta software and then complained when everything didn't work properly.

So they really only have themselves to blame, not KDE, Kubuntu, OpenSuse nor anyone else that offered up KDE4.0 packages in parallel to KDE3.5.xEdited 2010-08-02 17:09 UTC Mon, 02 Aug 2010 17:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Laurence) Comments Canonical? http://www.osnews.com/thread?435138 http://www.osnews.com/thread?435138 WOAH!

Could have happenned on time if Canonical contributed more upstream. ;) Mon, 02 Aug 2010 19:51:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (static666) Comments