Harvey It doesn't seem very clear to me to put packages in the repo and then say in the forum that users shouldn't install it (and xfce is a very common desktop) because not everyone reads it, if they are unstable need a warning or a dedicated repo or a name like xfceinprogress, if they are stable... better.
XFCE in Software Center
- Edited
I think there's a misunderstanding of the meaning of unstable. Heck, I don't even think anyone has even said these packages shouldn't be installed. Just that the experience as a whole is still a work in progress. Will they break your system? Very highly unlikely. The thing is, we have to have the packages in the repo to work on them, and we only have Unstable and Stable.
I think this all is the same as the time leading to Plasma edition being a thing.
13 days later
MichelDwo You mean that you have performed a manual configuration or do you have a kind of automatic sync
Nothing that fancy. I install packages on the VM so that it matches (as close as possible) those that are installed on my daily-driver laptop (Plasma). The idea is to be able to use it comfortably for an extended period, without constantly doing mental translations, like "where is that on this system," or "what do I use instead of that when I'm here."
That includes modifying /etc/fstab to include NAS shares that are present on my laptop, and if I'm feeling productive, writing symlinks to replace /home folders with appropriate shares. Thus, /home/jerry/Downloads actually links to my NAS's Downloads/Linux share, so that browsers, for example, use it automatically.
If I really LIKE a distro, I spend more time with it, for example, configuring Thunderbird with multiple email accounts, a couple of address books, and a couple of Google calendars. And sync'ing Vivaldi, and installing LastPass, so I have full access to all the sites I use. Thus, I can order lunch to be delivered, log on to health portals when I get an email saying that a new message awaits me there, and so on.
The bottom line is such that I can fire up the VM (Solus Xfce, in this case), and use it at full-screen, and just about forget that I'm looking at a VM instead of my Plasma laptop, itself. I did that for three days with Xfce, and was very impressed.
25 days later
WetGeek If I were setting up another laptop for Solus Xfce, I'd probably get rid of the dock.
Heh! As reported later, I not only didn't get rid of the dock in Xfce, I added the Latte dock to my Solus Plasma laptops and desktops. The more I used it in Xfce, the more I grew to like it.
The Latte dock, of course (coming from KDE), is even easier to use, and flawless in operation. It hides automatically when an app window intrudes on its space, and appears automatically when needed. It's easy to configure, and adding launcher icons to it is less complicated than with the Xfce dock. Once the desired launchers are in place, they're easily pinned to the dock (via the context menu), so they remain where you put 'em.
It's not a requirement that you move the bottom panel to the top of the screen, but I did that on all these installations, and quickly grew accustomed to it. The solution -- for me -- was to set up all my Plasma machines the same way. Now my first thought, when I want the menu, or the workspace switcher, or the system tray, is not to look DOWN, but to look UP.
By the way, having moved the bottom panel to the top of the screen, I also adjusted its size to make it thinner, and removed the icon-only task list, as with the Latte dock installed, it's now redundant. Having stated earlier that I'd probably remove the Xfce dock if I were ever to install Xfce on hardware, I thought I'd better provide a correction. As it happens, I went the other way instead. 
WetGeek It's easy to configure, and adding launcher icons to it is less complicated than with the Xfce dock.
technically the xfce 'dock' is a panel, closer in spirit, I believe, to icons on a taskbar---and also with some limitations compared to a traditional dock like latte/plank.
In my XFCE experience, those limitations made the XFCE panel unpleasant to use for myself, and I concur with you Latte or Plank or a traditional dock is much better suited for XFCE.
2 cents.
PS--still fascinated at what ZB has in store for the Solus implementation of XFCE.
brent I eagerly await the finished product, though.
I've lost track of what Solus DE you use now, but I don't think it's Plasma -- too configurable. If you're eager enough, you could easily add the Xfce DE to an existing Budgie or MATE system, and simply choose the DE at boot time. It's a lot safer than a dual-boot scheme, and a lot quicker to set up. And easier to un-do, if you want to get rid of it when the .ISO is released.
If I didn't use Plasma as my chosen DE, I'd happily install Xfce as a second DE on my daily laptop, but as you know, that's not an option. You, on the other hand, do have that option.
WetGeek born budgie, still budgie, with a Mate detour when the chips were down.
When the .iso finally rolls out for xfce I think I will install it next to Budgie on the same disk.
I've seen the team warn against Solus-next-to-Solus-same-disk-installs before but I forgot the reasons.
Appreciate your testing and info about it. I'm excited.
- Edited
brent I think I will install it next to Budgie on the same disk
That sounds like you're intending to have two separate copies of the entire GNOME stack, which is what both Budgie and Xfce DEs are based on. Two mostly identical systems to update every week instead of one. Using just one GNOME stack with the two DEs on top would seem to be a lot more efficient. Just sayin' ...
In the end, the important thing is that you do what makes you happy. Your computer, your time, etc.
WetGeek I've done the 2-DE at login before with other distros. I for one loathe winding up with two PDF viewers, 2 screenshot apps, 2 terminals, a long redundant Noah's Ark of double and triple default apps. Nauseating whenever I do the 2 DE thang.
I never did it in Solus but I have to imagine it follows suit.
Side-by-side seems cumbersome in that respect but I like the idea of two independent DE's. The 2-DE's at login are not independent of each other in the sense I wish they were.
brent I for one loathe winding up with two PDF viewers, 2 screenshot apps, 2 terminals, a long redundant Noah's Ark of double and triple default apps. Nauseating whenever I do the 2 DE thang.
Just curious ...
If you install two complete implementations of Solus, with two different DEs, how many of those default apps do you get that way? Seems to me the only difference is the duplication of the entire GNOME stack and the need to keep backing-up and updating two distros instead of one.
After all, regardless of how you achieve having two DEs, you only see one of them at a time.
WetGeek shared stack aside, XFCE traditionally has very different default apps than gnome-budgie. Up to a half-dozen important ones including terminal, and all the stuff I mentioned.
(again, I have not tried Solus' version, just about 4 other versions, though).
In my experience 2-for-1 installs populate the menus with duplicates and triplicates of common apps. The Mega-redundancies do not suit my personality-type.
In a 2-for-1 you see the other DE's stuff in all the menus...---so have to respectfully disagree with you there about seeing "one of them at a time." I see two DE's when I scan apps, menus.
brent In my experience 2-for-1 installs populate the menus with duplicates and triplicates of common apps. The Mega-redundancies do not suit my personality-type
And you've seen all this in Solus' implementations? I've somehow missed all that.
Regardless, as I've said, it's your computer and your time. What you're saying doesn't make any sense to me, but that's totally irrelevant. I don't need to support your system, so what I think doesn't matter at all. Peace, live long, and prosper!
- Edited
brent actually apples and apples, all this DE stuff.
At the risk of upsetting you, but for the possible benefit of others who may be reading this thread, I want to make one last post on this subject. To check whether I ended up with two sets of default applications, I re-installed the Budgie desktop on my Xfce VM. Like so ...
First, I'm going to boot into a Budgie session.
Here's the Budgie System menu.
Next, I'll boot into an Xfce session.
And here's the Xfce system menu. Note that I've replaced the original, which was crap, with the Whisker menu.
The first clue that you're absolutely right is that the Thunar file manager shows up in both menus. It's in the Budgie menu because it was already installed when this was a strictly Xfce VM. Nemo is also present, although Budgie puts that in the Accessories menu, for some unknown reason. And by exploring the menus a bit, I can see that the Xfce terminal is also available in the Budgie menu, as is the Budgie terminal, of course.
So, right here in front of everyone who may be reading this, I'll admit that I'm surprised, but not much. The software engineer in me can see why it would be hard to segregate these applications into their own respective menus, but I thought there was a chance that -- since two different menus were installed by the two DEs -- that might have been done. I now realize that both menus are getting their information from the same source, the same file system. It would probably take an extraordinary coding effort -- far more than it's worth -- to separate each DEs default apps into just that DE's menu.
But there's at least a second question that's answered by this experiment, and in the interest of full disclosure, I feel I should mention that here, too. Would it even be a good idea to make only Budgie defaults available in a Budgie session and only Xfce defaults available in an Xfce session? I'm not sure that would be a good idea at all. Having both sets of defaults available in either session provides the user with an important set of options.
For example, some may love Nemo and hate Thunar, or vice versa. Others might love the Xfce teminal, and hate the GNOME terminal that Budgie provides. Some might want to keep both versions of some of the default programs, preferring one of them in some situations, and the other for other situations. Again, I'm talking about choice, something that Linux is all about. And a brief session with eopkg rm would quickly get rid of those duplicates that one has decided never to use. (Actually, on a daily driver laptop, I'd remove both DE's default terminals, because I'd just want to useTerminology for both. It's that much better.)
So, in the end we're both right. You're right that one can end up with some duplicate default applications by installing two DEs for the same system. And I'm right in that it's your system, and your choice. Having both DEs available in this machine caused no nausia for me, and I rather appreciate the opportunity to try out two versions of a few apps and decide which one works best for me. I can then easily remove the one I don't care for, and never see it again.
Unlike those four other distros where you may have experimented with this, Solus is carefully curated, and doesn't fill a disk drive with tons of applications by default. So there are probably far fewer duplicates than you've dealt with elsewhere. We'll have to agree to disagree about whether it's easier to interrupt a boot process to select the OS version to launch or to pick a session at boot time, but as I keep saying, that's a matter of choice, too. I prefer doing it all without requiring a second disk in the computer, or the complication of separate partitions on one big disk (been there, done that, hated it), but then, that's just me.
Since I don't actually use Budgie or Xfce (or MATE or GNOME, for that matter) anywhere except in a VM, this isn't a big issue for me. I use KDE Plasma on all the hardware here, and there's nothing about any of the other DEs that I prefer to what Plasma provides. But someone running a GNOME-based DE will have such a choice (there's that word again, choice). And that's as it should be, but without knowing what options exist, there is no choice. That's why I've gone to the trouble to conduct this experiment, and document the results. Readers, including you, Brent, can make up their own minds. Their systems, their choice.