On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 7:53 PM, solarflow99 wrote:
> It looks as if SLIM has been abandoned, with no package in F-16 it makes me
> wonder what the chance it could be included again
slim has only been orphaned, and is still present in F16:
$ cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 16 (Verne)
#
It looks as if SLIM has been abandoned, with no package in F-16 it makes me
wonder what the chance it could be included again
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Am 27.11.2011 02:26, schrieb Jan Kratochvil:
> On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 23:40:58 +0100, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> Here is what my F14 laptop has:
>> http://people.xiph.org/~greg/packagekit.png
>>
>> It can be configured to only show end-user graphical applications
>
> That's not enough. I use my gra
On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 23:40:58 +0100, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> Here is what my F14 laptop has:
> http://people.xiph.org/~greg/packagekit.png
>
> It can be configured to only show end-user graphical applications
That's not enough. I use my grandfather unaffected by prior MS-Windows
experience as a
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> Can someone help me understand whats being asked for here? I can only
> guess that I'm not the only person confused by this thread.
Icons. The only thing I can see that Giovanni has mentioned that Packagekit
doesn't provide is icons. Presumably he wants each application's
Giovanni Campagna wrote:
> While we do have two nice UIs (gpk-application and apper) for package
> management, having to deal with packages, with no icons and no
> translations is not appropriate for end users.
We do have translations of the fields that it's meaningful to translate –
summary and
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Laurin wrote:
> I totally agree with you, a software center would be a really nice idea,
> also for more experienced user because they can browse easily through the
> available software and may find something interesting.
I am really confused by this thread.
Here
Hi
Forwarding with permission for discussions
Original Message
Delivered-To: methe...@gmail.com
Received: by 10.180.100.134 with SMTP id ey6cs329326wib;Fri, 25
Nov 2011 14:22:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.231.62.75 with SMTP id w11mr547054ibh.6.1322259722787;
Fri,
2011/11/23 Michael Schwendt
> On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:52:11 -0600, ME (Manuel) wrote:
>
> > (Cross Posting both to the Developers and Users List, sent a copy to
> > Rex Dieter, who I believe is the maintainer for Kmess in the Fedora
> > Community)
>
> http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/kmess
> --
> dev
Dear Fedorians,
goffice-0.9.0 was released recently, along with new gnumeric [1,2]. What
is your opinion on pushing the update to rawhide ASAP? To the best of my
knowledge stable goffice 0.10 and gnumeric 1.12 should be out by the
time Fedora 17 ships, so putting this into rawhide now would allow
Reindl Harald wrote:
> the biggest benefit of a linux-distribution is a consistent
> package-managment with straight dependencies and centralized repos, if you
> mean a additionak GUI for this -> fine
>
> if we speak about crap installing applications outside the rpm-database it
> would be the wor
On 11/26/2011 05:07 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
>
>
> Am 26.11.2011 00:28, schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
>> Or you have any reason to say that this is idea is stupid?
>
> the biggest benefit of a linux-distribution is a consistent package-managment
> with straight dependencies and centralized repos, i
Am 26.11.2011 00:28, schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
> Or you have any reason to say that this is idea is stupid?
the biggest benefit of a linux-distribution is a consistent package-managment
with straight dependencies and centralized repos, if you mean a additionak GUI
for this -> fine
if we speak
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am 26.11.2011 00:03, schrieb Giovanni Campagna:
> I hope that some people from the relevant group will point me to the
> right place (perhaps starting from what happened to
> fedora-app-install...), and I hope you like the idea in general.
>
> Giovann
Il giorno sab, 26/11/2011 alle 01.27 +0100, Florian Müllner ha scritto:
> While I agree that our app-install story sucks, I'm far less convinced that
> we need yet-another-downstream solution.
This is not really a downstream solution. Since OpenSuse GSoC 2011,
software-center can interact with Pac
On 25/11/11 23:24, Heiko Adams wrote:
>
> Would you jump from a building too if ubuntu guys are doing?
> In other words: copying every idea - no matter how stupid - just
> because ubuntu is doing it, doesn't bring any benifit to fedora IMHO.
> Or do we already have unity as primary desktop too, lik
16 matches
Mail list logo
