Difference between revisions of "User talk:Renyuneyun/Online accounts"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Usage of this page: re)
(re)
Line 17: Line 17:
 
:::As for [[Arch Linux#Principles]] and [[Arch packaging standards]] making things harder, apart of being [[Code of conduct#Ineffective discussion ("bikeshed")|bikeshedding]] it is simply not true as you get list of optional dependencies printed in terminal after you install a package and said principles are in no way preventing improvement of official documentation on those topics. If you think KDE is packaged in a wrong or broken way, file a bug for component that does not work as intended. Arch Linux is established project and principles are what has formed it and large precondition of its success. If one thinks being user-friendly is more important than being user-centric Debian packaging standards are more akin to what you suggest is better.
 
:::As for [[Arch Linux#Principles]] and [[Arch packaging standards]] making things harder, apart of being [[Code of conduct#Ineffective discussion ("bikeshed")|bikeshedding]] it is simply not true as you get list of optional dependencies printed in terminal after you install a package and said principles are in no way preventing improvement of official documentation on those topics. If you think KDE is packaged in a wrong or broken way, file a bug for component that does not work as intended. Arch Linux is established project and principles are what has formed it and large precondition of its success. If one thinks being user-friendly is more important than being user-centric Debian packaging standards are more akin to what you suggest is better.
 
:::Even though I like your expressiveness in your comment, excessive speculations and forecasting do not help to prove additional points if there were such made, they are not facts or something we can use reliably to form our own opinion. -- [[User:Svito|Svito]] ([[User talk:Svito|talk]]) 02:26, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 
:::Even though I like your expressiveness in your comment, excessive speculations and forecasting do not help to prove additional points if there were such made, they are not facts or something we can use reliably to form our own opinion. -- [[User:Svito|Svito]] ([[User talk:Svito|talk]]) 02:26, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
 +
 +
::::Yeah, that makes sense that GNOME and KDE are quite different in many ways so it may not be appropriate to compare them. I was just thinking from a plain user's view, though I have to admit the technical differences may make things complicated. Maybe moving this page to KDE is not as unclear as I initially thought. Maybe the comparison thing (if any) could be moved to [[Desktop environment]].
 +
::::For improving condition through packing system, I agree it's not '''arch's''' ''packaging'' method makes things harder. What I was trying to refer to is the fact that arch don't bundle all these things together or provide them initially (and I certainly don't think arch should do it in that way). Because the packages are emerging and all the "function" packages act in an ad hoc way, so maybe listing them as opt-dependency isn't a good idea (from the semantics view).
 +
::::Is there a tool to move this page to [[KDE]], or it is supposed to be done manually? --[[User:Renyuneyun|Renyuneyun]] ([[User talk:Renyuneyun|talk]]) 23:20, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:20, 8 March 2018

Usage of this page

Only KDE added is because I currently only explore much in KDE online accounts. It doesn't necessarily mean there will only be KDE afterwards. Ideally, there would be KDE, GNOME (and other DEs if exists), and comparison between them. The comparision will give the user (especially new users) a clear view that what integrations different DEs provide, and this may help them to choose which DE to use. Merging them together to specific DE's page may lack such a "direct" view.

I can sketch the rough structure to the page if necessary, but the other parts will be empty (at least for now). --Renyuneyun (talk) 22:04, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Does it really make sense to keep all desktop environments on the same page? I doubt it's a deciding factor for choosing an environment and people usually use only one at a time. -- Lahwaacz (talk) 22:12, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I agree people usually stick with one DE after they have had much experience on one of them. However, according to my (and some friends') experience, I'd struggling picking one "best" DE when I became aware of these many DEs -- I'd try many of them at first. Online account integration is (from my perspective) becoming more important than in the old days.
Generally, most DEs are well described in their specific page. But online account integration is somewhat new to computers (OSes), especially Linux, and is not well developed in many cases nor well documented in both arch wiki or their (DEs') wiki. Arch's packaging philosophy (KISS) make this even harder to new users -- they don't know what are provided, nor do they know "where (/how) to know". Describing the online account integration in their separated pages can make this easier, but couldn't provide a good view for new user when they are trying different DEs -- unless new users are all expected to read many long textual wiki pages rather than installing the packages and try on hand.
Actually before creating thie page, I was thinking to add this to KDE. The problem is: which section should this article be placed? The online account integration is composed of (part of) many different components, and there doesn't seem to be a good place for it.
Another factor: personally, as an arch user for many years, I struggled a lot when using KDE's online account integration. The superficial Akonadi is the only thing I was aware of for many years (since kde 4) and I wasn't aware that installing more packages are required if I want to extend the "online account" section (rather than waiting for updates of the asked "kaccounts-providers"); similarly, I also didn't know some of them (e.g. google account integration) are incomplete and I need to install other packages (with the name prefix "kio-" or so, rather than "kaccount-") to enable their full power. I don't think my case is the only case, so a dedicated page will make these people easier to find what they need. --Renyuneyun (talk) 22:53, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
I understand your point of view and where you are coming from as a user, but online accounts are currenly only relevant for GNOME and KDE and they have different implementation of these and therefore different configuration instructions. Both GNOME and KDE are not interchangable and their software stack and applications are only integrated with matching part, not others.
KDE configuration belongs in KDE#Configuration currently. As for GNOME, it already has Online accounts as subsection of GNOME#Configuration/System settings. Having separate article for configuring some aspect of 2 distinct and mutually exclusive desktop environments would be counterproductive to the reader, as there is not much detail to the subject currently. One would need to install both of them to configure both of them, so you would read both GNOME and KDE anyway. And for comparison there is Desktop environment article that is not limited to comparing desktop environment by a single feature.
As for Arch Linux#Principles and Arch packaging standards making things harder, apart of being bikeshedding it is simply not true as you get list of optional dependencies printed in terminal after you install a package and said principles are in no way preventing improvement of official documentation on those topics. If you think KDE is packaged in a wrong or broken way, file a bug for component that does not work as intended. Arch Linux is established project and principles are what has formed it and large precondition of its success. If one thinks being user-friendly is more important than being user-centric Debian packaging standards are more akin to what you suggest is better.
Even though I like your expressiveness in your comment, excessive speculations and forecasting do not help to prove additional points if there were such made, they are not facts or something we can use reliably to form our own opinion. -- Svito (talk) 02:26, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, that makes sense that GNOME and KDE are quite different in many ways so it may not be appropriate to compare them. I was just thinking from a plain user's view, though I have to admit the technical differences may make things complicated. Maybe moving this page to KDE is not as unclear as I initially thought. Maybe the comparison thing (if any) could be moved to Desktop environment.
For improving condition through packing system, I agree it's not arch's packaging method makes things harder. What I was trying to refer to is the fact that arch don't bundle all these things together or provide them initially (and I certainly don't think arch should do it in that way). Because the packages are emerging and all the "function" packages act in an ad hoc way, so maybe listing them as opt-dependency isn't a good idea (from the semantics view).
Is there a tool to move this page to KDE, or it is supposed to be done manually? --Renyuneyun (talk) 23:20, 8 March 2018 (UTC)