Does CCSM really break unity? It seems to me like unity breaks CCSM.
I didn't answer your extremely badly written poll question but for the record - please DON'T pull ccsm. I use it and need it. Fix unity so that it works properly with other compiz plugins instead.
Larry Thiel - 12 years ago
Removing it from the Repos is a far more drastic move than removing it from the Software Center. I would probably vote yes if that had been the proposal as I see the Software Center as being primarily aimed at the novice. Most power users still use apt-get or Synaptic rather than the software center. Most article writers also still write sudo apt-get install xxxxx rather than explaining how to use a GUI and including screenshots.
Roj - 12 years ago
The Enhanced Desktop Zoom tool is indispensible to me as a visually impaired user. I rejoiced when I found it in 10.04 and later 10.10. After 10.10, Ubuntu fell on its face vis a vis support for visually impaired users. The Unity interface, especially its bugs with Compiz, is the main reason I switched to Mint. Canonical should be ashamed of its disgraceful abandonment of visually impaired users and rather than trying to sweep its own shortcomings under the rug, should spend time and resources fixing the problem. That's certainly more honourable and intelligent than trying to remove the evidence of its own incompetence.
Davide - 12 years ago
I fully disagree with removing CCSM from the repos! They should better fix bugs in unity related to CCSM.
jacques - 12 years ago
the day Unity will work perfectly on double screen configuration, the ability to put the launcher on the right instead of the left, the ability to control precisely the placement of opening windows, the ability to 4 windows side by side .... then I'll probably start using the unity desktop for more than a few hours. Only then I would agree on removing CCSM from the repo.
PS out of my 4 computers, only one has Unity desktop... my Netbook which is only for web browsing when I travel light
The question should be "Should CCSM Be Removed from the Ubuntu Repos?", without the "Potentially Damaging Apps" phrase.
Niboocs - 12 years ago
The other question in the story better nailed it -- the question is not whether CCSM should be removed from the repos but whether Unity should be a part of CCSM. The answer to that question is No. It never belonged there, because the settings of Unity and the settings of CCSM are so at odds with one-another.
Now that Unity is a serious GUI option it needs it's own configuration manager -- one that is up-to-date with the settings available in Unity, comes pre-loaded with Ubuntu and doesn't have to be installed to be used. It should be really easy to find also, so that beginners can configure their own desktop. Why give them Linux but make out that it's non-configurable? Non-configurable is for Windows and Mac. Not for Linux.
But yes being able to configure the GUI is what Linux is all about, and making it easy to do will help more people to make it the way they like it, and probably make them more likely to continue using Ubuntu.
And by not removing CCSM you will avoid upsetting those who use Ubuntu but not Unity.
sean garner - 12 years ago
@sathish corporate IT departments have the ability to create our own repositories and sync only the apps we want our users to have access to.
Yes ccsm is a potentially dangerous tool and assumes that the user knows about the conflicts with unity and other plugins. But this assumes you use unity. What about users who don't use unity? Why remove a tool which only has some sonflicts unity when you support the option to remove unity?
Linux is all about freedom. CCSM isn't installed by default, but is available as an option if I want it. You can also use gconf-editor to "break" Gnome, but no one's talking about getting rid of it. When I first started using CCSM under Unity, I broke Gnome several times, and had to reinstall the entire thing at least once. But this is Linux, I should have the right to do that. If I'm trying to set up a bulletproof system, I shouldn't be playing with CCSM in the first place. But that needs to be my choice.
If the Ubuntu repositories don't carry it, I'll just go somewhere that does, but I'll be annoyed. It's not like Cannonical can prevent me from using CCSM; but they can make it annoying. Is that the goal?
Jack Steele - 12 years ago
Of course not! People should be able to have freedom with their computer, it's why we use Ubuntu!
sathish kumar - 12 years ago
corporate users need stable distribution and consumers who would use ubuntu as production enviornment need stabiltiy and reliable. So ccsm should go out. It is the hell of mess. it is only for tech geeks and not for average users.
I use CCSM to adjust the brightness of my monitor. Inspite of reducing the brightness to a minimum, my monitor hurts my eyes until I tweak the brightness with CCSM. Is there any other app which does the same? Why don't they add more features rather than take away existing features.
whidden - 12 years ago
I'd like to point out that the way the question has been worded could potentially influence poll responses - the inclusion of "Potentially Damaging Apps" gives the responadant a negative impression of CCSM without any indication of the numerous positive features of the app. I think "Should CCSM be removed from the software repos?" would have been a less biased and more proper way to word it. Perhaps have a follow-up question regarding the removal of potentiall damaging apps.
I personally don't think it should be removed. I think the bigger concern is the number of non-functional apps that have been in there far too long.
I personally like CCSM and find it has the best layout for tweaking appearance settings. I've never run into any problems with it other than having unity crash while switching settings - a simple restart fixes that no problem. If you know what you're doing, it's a great app.
Perhaps the best solution would be to include some kind of warning in at least the application's description in the USC, letting new users know that it can potentially mess things up if they don't know what they're doing while still allowing those experienced or brave enough to install it.
Nobody wants to get a call from their grandma saying the solitaire machine you set up for her is apparently in a panic over corn, but flexibility is what defines open source - people just need to be aware of how far it can bend before it breaks.
TK - 12 years ago
No. Don't take away my loaded gun and my ability to tweak. Why not remove gParted from the repositories, too? It's much more dangerous of a tool in my opinion.
sean garner - 12 years ago
FWIW I've never borked my system with it so maybe that influences my opinion. I personally wouldn't advocate removing it because for me its perfectly functional and I wouldn't want to make the customisations I make in gconf (assuming that's still where its kept).
The goal is to protect naieve users which removing it from the repos achieves. If I were making the decision I would be asking myself if this solution was the best one vilable to me. Personally I dont believe it is.
Does CCSM really break unity? It seems to me like unity breaks CCSM.
I didn't answer your extremely badly written poll question but for the record - please DON'T pull ccsm. I use it and need it. Fix unity so that it works properly with other compiz plugins instead.
Removing it from the Repos is a far more drastic move than removing it from the Software Center. I would probably vote yes if that had been the proposal as I see the Software Center as being primarily aimed at the novice. Most power users still use apt-get or Synaptic rather than the software center. Most article writers also still write sudo apt-get install xxxxx rather than explaining how to use a GUI and including screenshots.
The Enhanced Desktop Zoom tool is indispensible to me as a visually impaired user. I rejoiced when I found it in 10.04 and later 10.10. After 10.10, Ubuntu fell on its face vis a vis support for visually impaired users. The Unity interface, especially its bugs with Compiz, is the main reason I switched to Mint. Canonical should be ashamed of its disgraceful abandonment of visually impaired users and rather than trying to sweep its own shortcomings under the rug, should spend time and resources fixing the problem. That's certainly more honourable and intelligent than trying to remove the evidence of its own incompetence.
I fully disagree with removing CCSM from the repos! They should better fix bugs in unity related to CCSM.
the day Unity will work perfectly on double screen configuration, the ability to put the launcher on the right instead of the left, the ability to control precisely the placement of opening windows, the ability to 4 windows side by side .... then I'll probably start using the unity desktop for more than a few hours. Only then I would agree on removing CCSM from the repo.
PS out of my 4 computers, only one has Unity desktop... my Netbook which is only for web browsing when I travel light
The question should be "Should CCSM Be Removed from the Ubuntu Repos?", without the "Potentially Damaging Apps" phrase.
The other question in the story better nailed it -- the question is not whether CCSM should be removed from the repos but whether Unity should be a part of CCSM. The answer to that question is No. It never belonged there, because the settings of Unity and the settings of CCSM are so at odds with one-another.
Now that Unity is a serious GUI option it needs it's own configuration manager -- one that is up-to-date with the settings available in Unity, comes pre-loaded with Ubuntu and doesn't have to be installed to be used. It should be really easy to find also, so that beginners can configure their own desktop. Why give them Linux but make out that it's non-configurable? Non-configurable is for Windows and Mac. Not for Linux.
But yes being able to configure the GUI is what Linux is all about, and making it easy to do will help more people to make it the way they like it, and probably make them more likely to continue using Ubuntu.
And by not removing CCSM you will avoid upsetting those who use Ubuntu but not Unity.
@sathish corporate IT departments have the ability to create our own repositories and sync only the apps we want our users to have access to.
Yes ccsm is a potentially dangerous tool and assumes that the user knows about the conflicts with unity and other plugins. But this assumes you use unity. What about users who don't use unity? Why remove a tool which only has some sonflicts unity when you support the option to remove unity?
Linux is all about freedom. CCSM isn't installed by default, but is available as an option if I want it. You can also use gconf-editor to "break" Gnome, but no one's talking about getting rid of it. When I first started using CCSM under Unity, I broke Gnome several times, and had to reinstall the entire thing at least once. But this is Linux, I should have the right to do that. If I'm trying to set up a bulletproof system, I shouldn't be playing with CCSM in the first place. But that needs to be my choice.
If the Ubuntu repositories don't carry it, I'll just go somewhere that does, but I'll be annoyed. It's not like Cannonical can prevent me from using CCSM; but they can make it annoying. Is that the goal?
Of course not! People should be able to have freedom with their computer, it's why we use Ubuntu!
corporate users need stable distribution and consumers who would use ubuntu as production enviornment need stabiltiy and reliable. So ccsm should go out. It is the hell of mess. it is only for tech geeks and not for average users.
I use CCSM to adjust the brightness of my monitor. Inspite of reducing the brightness to a minimum, my monitor hurts my eyes until I tweak the brightness with CCSM. Is there any other app which does the same? Why don't they add more features rather than take away existing features.
I'd like to point out that the way the question has been worded could potentially influence poll responses - the inclusion of "Potentially Damaging Apps" gives the responadant a negative impression of CCSM without any indication of the numerous positive features of the app. I think "Should CCSM be removed from the software repos?" would have been a less biased and more proper way to word it. Perhaps have a follow-up question regarding the removal of potentiall damaging apps.
I personally don't think it should be removed. I think the bigger concern is the number of non-functional apps that have been in there far too long.
I personally like CCSM and find it has the best layout for tweaking appearance settings. I've never run into any problems with it other than having unity crash while switching settings - a simple restart fixes that no problem. If you know what you're doing, it's a great app.
Perhaps the best solution would be to include some kind of warning in at least the application's description in the USC, letting new users know that it can potentially mess things up if they don't know what they're doing while still allowing those experienced or brave enough to install it.
Nobody wants to get a call from their grandma saying the solitaire machine you set up for her is apparently in a panic over corn, but flexibility is what defines open source - people just need to be aware of how far it can bend before it breaks.
No. Don't take away my loaded gun and my ability to tweak. Why not remove gParted from the repositories, too? It's much more dangerous of a tool in my opinion.
FWIW I've never borked my system with it so maybe that influences my opinion. I personally wouldn't advocate removing it because for me its perfectly functional and I wouldn't want to make the customisations I make in gconf (assuming that's still where its kept).
The goal is to protect naieve users which removing it from the repos achieves. If I were making the decision I would be asking myself if this solution was the best one vilable to me. Personally I dont believe it is.