- cross-posted to:
- nix@programming.dev
- linux@programming.dev
- cross-posted to:
- nix@programming.dev
- linux@programming.dev
You must log in or register to comment.
I’ve been following the work on COSMIC (though not super actively) and I keep on saying that I like what I’m seeing because, well, I do! The idea of a tiling DE is a very exciting one and COSMIC really has the potential to become a Major Linux DE.
I’m just happy there’s a rust DE being written in slint. KDE is nice and all, but it’s all C++. No way am I touching that trainwreck of a language again.
I particularly like that, just like their current Gnome extension, it supports both tiling and floating, with a quick toggle between them.
This’ll be a pretty interesting year for people interested in DEs.
Incredibly excited to try it. I love the early support for Nix, I plan to run it as soon as a NixOS module becomes available!
Huge props to the design team here, the aesthetic looks amazing on all of the apps I’ve tried. They all feel consistent and look great.
Tldr: New desktop environment designed for PopOS (but usable elsewhere)
I’ve been following Cosmic and really looking forward to it. I love the idea of a Gnome-like desktop without Gnome-like design decisions.
[cosmic-randr] uses the wlr output configuration Wayland protocols.
Does this mean cosmic-randr should work on other compositors that support the wlr output configuration protocol (e.g. sway, hyprland, river, …)? It’s great to see cosmic adopting existing protocols, instead of compositor specific protocols (or worse, no external app support at all).
Also, it’s great how portable Cosmic DE seems to be, as it’s already mostly packaged on NixOS. On first look, cosmic-term seems to be a quick terminal so I might switch to it, as well as cosmic-files.
Just curious, on a scale from cowsay to MS Word, how difficult would it be to port COSMIC to the BSDs, assuming wayland support?
It doesn’t use GTK does it?
Why do we invent new DEs instead of making proper settings app in already existing ones?
Because that’s not how software development works, and that’s not how you make progress in the field. In order for our technical vision to be integrated with an existing desktop, such as GNOME, it would have required that they give us the reigns to their project to delete their entire codebase and rebuild it into exactly what you see today in COSMIC.
As in life, sometimes you’ve got to demolish, pave, and build better foundations. There’s a lot of cool technologies available to build a truly next-generation desktop experience in, but you’re not going to get it through rigid bureaucracy and old tools. With COSMIC, we’ve got freedom to make decisions and build something truly unique, and we’re using our talent to show you what we can do.
Well said. I’m nervous and excited to see what this turns in to. Pop is my daily driver and has been for years. I’m excited to see all this progress.
If you will create “next gen” desktop, you will just solve some problems of already existing ones and create your own. Maturity of software is far more important, than uniqueness. GNOME didn’t evolve into its current state for no reason.
Translation: no one should ever attempt to innovate on the Linux desktop. GNOME is the epitome of software development and everyone else should quietly give up. If GNOME can’t fix an issue, no one can. Only GNOME has the god-given right to make decisions on how desktops are developed for Linux. There can only be one party. The One Desktop principle. Contribute to your party leader, or else…
Because some developers act on their own consciousness and don’t have a slavemaster corporate manager telling them what they need to do or not do.
When one doesn’t like any of the available choices yet a new one is born. Can you measure how many v.terminals we have, or how many window managers on X11?
Fortunately such “new choices” get abandoned very quickly. Making new solution instead of improving existing ones is counterproductive. Unless there is a large legacy codebase. Smart people have invented Unix principles to avoid that.
We do what we must because we can.
FOSS software development is very much like evolution. Many projects are born but only the best thrive. It is a wasteful system because resources are spread over similar projects, but it creates very good software.
Not really. Best Foss projects do not always thrive. Git wasn’t really better than mercurial. But it had happened to be published earlier, so it got wider adoption.
Welcome to FOSS lol
