Interesting post about Lubuntu

Just spotted the above, it’s an old post from November, but it’s an interesting read, especially this part:

- LXDE is dying. Well, except pcmanfm, all components are frozen and will probably not going to see any improvements in the next 6 months. Expect only bug fixes and translations updates.
  • LXQt (the merge of Razor-qt and LXDE, using Qt instead of GTK) is slowly
    taking the place of the LXDE GTK. All work are done on this branch.

What are Peppermint’s plans (presumably for Peppermint 6), regarding this statement? Or is it just the Lubuntu dev making a statement, rather than LXDE themselves?

Nope, it’s LXDE … I don’t think it’s a secret that Peppermint will NOT be following LXDE down the Qt rabbit hole, and suffice to say the team has a roadmap in place to move away from any reliance on LXDE components (except possibly pcmanfm).

The move to xfwm4 in Peppermint 4 was a start, but does NOT mean Peppermint is going Xfce (before anyone asks).

As for the exact direction … a little mystery add to the allure, don’t you think :wink:

Ah, you’ve gotta keep a bit of mystery to keep the romance alive :wink:

The whole thing seems a bit weird to me though! LXDE is a really popular DE (I’d have guessed more people use it than Xfce, definately more than E17/18), so it seems strange to suggest that it’s “dying”, implying that the devs are abandoning it. Plenty of “community only” projects survive on their own, so I’m surprised to learn that LXDE’s doors are closing (if not completely shutting). I wonder if it’ll end up like MATE, where it’s pretty much just “ticking over”

LXDE is not dying, but they decided not to move from gtk+2 to gtk+3, instead deciding to work with the RazorQt devs to move to Qt … LXDE-Qt:

There is nothing wrong with LXDE-Qt. If anything to go by Razor-Qt is a good starting point. I have used it for a while and was very impressed by it.
The combined effort of LXDE & Razor Qt devs can lead to great things. Contrary to beliefs, the QT base is light (only KDE make it resource hungry).

I’m not “knocking” their decision to go with Qt, nor am I suggesting it will be heavy … just stating Peppermint is not planning to follow, you’ll have to wait and see why but it’s in no way a reflection or commentary on LXDE-Qt :wink:

Peppermint has never stuck to the default LXDE configuration or application suite, and it’s natural direction was diverging even further from a “true” LXDE environment before the announcement of LXDE’s move to Qt … in truth their move to Qt had little affect on plans already in place at Peppermint :slight_smile:

isn’t all this another example of the kind of fragmentation that’s hurting Linux as a whole, I don’t fully understand the implications or the politics in all this and you can flame me if you like but from a non techy person like myself as much as I love the choice Linux offers it can be a bit frustrating at times ie i use a program that used to work so well, then the author changed to qt and now it sucks on my desktop it’s slow it doesn’t scale properly, Cairo Dock wont hide when it’s open and I’m sure it’s only because it’s just not quite compatible with my desktop anymore

Rant over :slight_smile:


I suppose it is

That’s a whole other argument … I’m not sure it is hurting Linux.

The last thing I want is the single Linux distro that some people call for … you only have to look at Microsoft and Apple to see what you get in a single environment OS where new ideas are put down rather than allowed to simmer and see what naturally rises to the top.

I’m not one for the single Linux distro either and I love the choice Linux offers but I think a bit more standard compatibility between distributions & desktop environments etc wouldn’t do any harm

ie I see no point in 3 display servers Xorg, Wayland & Mir, surely that’s only gonna cause needless complications for developers with no advantage to the end user, why can’t we just pick one and call it good


In your example we’d probably stick with Xorg … right ? … but in most people opinion Xorg has become far too unwieldy and has stalled.

Without the others how would we ever know if there was a better way ?

The best will rise to the top and probably get picked up by everyone else … then the same thing will happen all over again … that’s how things work, and it drives faster development.

Personally what a lot of people call fragmentation I call a good development model that has brought Linux to where it is now in a very short time span.
It may not be the best model from a marketing standpoint, but it certainly is for development … the real question is “does Linux really need to bow to marketing pressure, or are we happier to see rapid development”, indeed does it need marketing at all ?

I understand Xorg has problems and I wasn’t suggesting we should stick with it, I was trying to point out that display servers is one example where choice is not a good thing but I agree what you’re saying re rapid development and I understand progress brings with it disruption, but I was talking from a non techy users standpoint who can see that disruption as a failure in Linux instead of an unavoidable and acceptable aspect of progress and therin lies the harm


I understand the choice (what some call fragmentation) can be disorienting to people coming to Linux from Windows and OS X (god knows it was to me), but that’s not the same as saying it’s harmful (?)

What’s your metric for “harmful” ? … there’s no board members with a bottom line to worry about here :wink:

What's your metric for "harmful" ?

Maybe harmful was not a good choice of word but it was the best I could come up with, but here’s an example I recently installed SolydX on a spare drive because I like trying different distros and I wanted to try something Debian based, and i’ve found there’s a few programs i can’t have because it’s Debian based and I don’t have the Ubuntu repos and if I try to install by adding the PPA from the developers website and try to install it can’t locate the package, now this could be my fault I may be doing something wrong and there’s an easy fix,but would a new user see it that way ? but if I was running the latest version of Ubuntu I probably wouldn’t have that problem at all, this is the sort of thing that could make a new user say sod this and back to Windows,

If someone was thinking about moving to Linux and go onto the many Linux v Windows debates online they’ll find fragmentation very often used by the pro Windows & pro Mac people to knock Linux most of it is just ignorant fanboyism but nonetheless can put people off from trying Linux themselves

I know there’s no bottom line to worry about but if linux is to advance in terms of development we need to get more users on board and these things can inhibit that, thats what I mean by “Harm”

Maybe the problem is generalising different distributions as “Linux” … nobody would expect an OS X package to run on Windows … why should they expect a Fedora package to run on Ubuntu ?

In reality though (and unlike Windows/OS X) Linux at least has other ways to install that “usually” works on all dirsto’s … ie. building from source or binary installers … granted these are not beginner friendly, but at least they exist.

Just because Windows and OS X fans don’t understand how the Linux world works doesn’t make it “bad” or “wrong” … and there’s something to be said for if they can’t be bothered to learn the “Linux way”, sod em … no harm :slight_smile:

To an extent I was just playing devils advocate here … I do understand what you’re saying, I just find myself less and less bothered about trying to get Linux on everyone’s desktop, if some people choose to think it’s hard/fragmented/for geeks/command line only/etc. so be it … Linux is what it is, the IT world is better for it, and it’s slowly quickly taking over the world anyway.

I’m afraid Ubuntu PPA’s won’t work for Debian … but that’s not to say the software in them won’t (it may, or it may not) … it’s just the way PPA’s work, Debian isn’t called “raring” or “saucy” etc. so has no way to know which version to get from the PPA.