← Back to team overview

lubuntu-desktop team mailing list archive

Re: Mplayer, Qt4, Lubuntu release date, Modular installer

 

I see no reason Lubuntu for Karmic could not be called a beta or preview
 of Lubuntu or similar.

In respect to qt, the toolkit itself is not that large.  One problem is
matching qt themes (fonts, colors, controls) and preferences with gtk.
If we have default settings that match, then I see no problem with this
at all.  As to whether mplayer/smplayer vs vlc vs something else, that
is a different question :).

Mario Behling wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> I would like to exchange with you some thoughts that came up in an
> exchange with PCMan concerning using Mplayer, Qt4 and the release date
> of lubuntu.
> 
> I agree with PCMan that we should get feedback from the community
> first before releasing a stable lubuntu. The current lubuntu is
> already quite good, but there will probably be some bugs that we dont
> know, besides bugs that we know of e.g. in PCManFM. As PCMan is
> working on a new version of the file manger, I hope we will be able to
> include it.
> 
> Read on below.
> 
> - Mario
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: PCMan
> 
> Hi all
> Clearly Mplayer has the best performance on old machines which are the
> target of Lubuntu.
> However, the usability of currently available mplayer GUI frontend are
> quite problematic.
> SMplayer, although being developed with Qt4, undoubtedly has quite
> good usability compared with others. Qt4 is not a problem. It's
> bigger, but it's not very big. Besides, there will be more and more
> applications written in Qt4 in the future. Denying the use of Qt4 is
> quite unwise, IMHO. If you can find something that are as good, feel
> free to replace it. But the problem is, there isn't. The other usable
> player should be VLC, which is also written in Qt4, too. Xine is yet
> another solution, but it doesn't have good performance, and the
> usability is not good, either. So it's good for nothing. Rather than
> including something that is good for nothing, I'd rather include
> something that at least give you good usability. This is the
> rationale.
> 
> Another concern is, can we postpone the release of Lubuntu? Rather
> than releasing something new but broken, I'd rather release it when
> it's really ready. Give the users something that is half-done is not a
> good way for marketing.
> I'm confident that Lubuntu will be ready for everyday use at the time
> of next Ubuntu LTS release. However, if we want to make it for 9.10,
> we might end up with a broken distro that is problematic. IMHO,
> keeping it in Alpha or Beta status is more preferable. Then just use
> 9.10 release to get enough feedback from the users. Things should be
> ready in Q1, 2010. Then the next LTS will be the right time for first
> official release of Lubuntu.
> 
> For application selection, I'd suggest creating a modular installer
> and let the user choose what they want. This doesn't need to be
> included in the Ubuntu installer. We can run a app selection wizard at
> first-time startup. This can be the perfect solution for application
> selection.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> Post to     : lubuntu-desktop@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~lubuntu-desktop
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
begin:vcard
fn:David Sugar
n:Sugar;David
org:Canonical
adr:;;;;;;United States
email;internet:david.sugar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
title:Mobile Developer
tel;work:+1 609 465 5336
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.canonical.com
version:2.1
end:vcard


References