4 ms·

I still think the whole Linux Desktop problem can be summarized in one sentence: There is a lack of a simple desktop app development environment. Yes there is

I still think the whole Linux Desktop problem can be summarized in one sentence: There is a lack of a simple desktop app development environment. Yes there is GTK and yes there QT. But regardless of how much people may hate Xcode, it allowed people to create solid desktop applications in a fraction of the time that was needed to do the same in either GTK or QT. It's better documented, it's smoother, it's easier to structure your application in terms of the framework rather than programming language. The whole thing is a little like the Rails vs. Flask or Go argument. Yes Flask is really cool, and in Go you can build really cool stuff and it's modular, you select a muxer and stitch it together, it does more requests per second, but if you just want to bash out a quick web application you're better off picking the first option. The app store is hard argument is so far down the line... If you look at all the things Apple did before they pushed their app store it almost doesn't matter.

dcgudeman 9y ago
I agree. I commented earlier about how I think they should pool their resources to create an Xcode for linux. Seems like one kind of already exists (https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Builder https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Builder) but I don't how much is being invested in it. And honestly I don't really care that much about the language or the UI framework so long as they just pick one.
- rjzzleep 9y ago
  That looks like glib. Which is kind of nasty in my opinion. At some point they pushed for Vala, it makes the whole thing a bit more pleasent. But personally I had a feeling it was on life support the entire time. Some bindings were plain broken and impossible to fix, interop had really crappy documentation. At some point I just gave up. (I'm mixing IDE with language/lib right now, but for Gnome it does go hand in hand IMHO)
- merlijn_s 9y ago
  With the flatpack integration, Builder really has the potential to become the Xcode for Linux. I hope that Ubuntu starts to support Builder. Ubuntu tried something similar with qtcreator and the Ubuntu sdk, but that was a really bad experience. Let's hope that the switch to Gnome also means that Ubuntu switch their efforts to Builder.
  - rjzzleep 9y ago
    flatpack solves a deployment/distribution issue. distribution is irrelevant when you have nothing to distribute.
    - merlijn_s 9y ago
      The biggest issue is the distribution. One of the devs of the Minecraft Windows 10 edition said that it would be trivial to port that to desktop Linux but they would have to set up their own payment and distribution system, which just isn't worth it for that tiny market. Having packaging and distribution built into an IDE goes a great length to solve that issue.
      - voltagex_ 9y ago
        Except they could throw it on to Steam for Linux - it's a business decision not to put it on there and let Valve take 30%.
  - dcgudeman 9y ago
    I hope so, but honestly I feel like they are trying to keep it too general. I was looking at some of the critical components like Glade (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glade_Interface_Designer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glade_Interface_Designer) and noticed this: Glade is programming language–independent, and does not produce code for events, but rather an XML file that is then used with an appropriate binding (such as GtkAda for use with the Ada programming language) Maybe Ada is more popular than I know, but I would think it's more valuable to spend time making the development process better for C++ devs (or w/e) than build a system so general that it can support Ada.
- sjellis 9y ago
  Red Hat have been sponsoring Christian Hergert (https://blogs.gnome.org/chergert/ https://blogs.gnome.org/chergert/) to work on Builder full-time for a while now, with a specific focus on Flatpak integration, and there are other contributors, including GSoC students working on specific features. The missing piece is public server infrastructure for accepting Flatpak packages from GNOME Builder and distributing them to GNOME Software clients, and that is currently in development as https://flathub.org/ https://flathub.org/
- michaelmrose 9y ago
  There are a multitude of different dev environments I don't think we need a new one that will probably have less effort invested than current popular environments.
hjek 9y ago
Racket is well documented, has a well working (if slightly heavy) IDE, and packages an app by running "raco exe" (Around 6.5 mb for a "HelloWorld". That could be worse.). And you can package for Windows just as easily using Wine. I've found the error messages of Racket very friendly also. It has never been easier to build GNU/Linux Desktop Apps. http://racket-lang.org/ http://racket-lang.org/ Extremely easy to do GUIs, and they have weird DSLs, for example for video editing and shell scripting: http://docs.racket-lang.org/video/index.html http://docs.racket-lang.org/video/index.html http://docs.racket-lang.org/rash/index.html http://docs.racket-lang.org/rash/index.html
ledgerdev 9y ago
> There is a lack of a simple desktop app development environment. Does anyone think that Xaml Standard + GTK + dotnet core might be a potential path forward? Supposedly Microsoft is working on a GTK implementation, and very much intrigues me. edit: Discussion here http://www.xamarinpodcast.com/41 http://www.xamarinpodcast.com/41 21:30 - New "backends" for Xamarin.Forms - macOS, GTK#, and WPF
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
tyingq 9y ago
Something of a dark horse for now, but there's Flutter. Maybe if it succeeds on mobile they'll add the missing desktop widgets.

dcgudeman 9y ago

I agree. I commented earlier about how I think they should pool their resources to create an Xcode for linux. Seems like one kind of already exists (https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Builder https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Builder) but I don't how much is being invested in it. And honestly I don't really care that much about the language or the UI framework so long as they just pick one.

rjzzleep 9y ago
That looks like glib. Which is kind of nasty in my opinion. At some point they pushed for Vala, it makes the whole thing a bit more pleasent. But personally I had a feeling it was on life support the entire time. Some bindings were plain broken and impossible to fix, interop had really crappy documentation. At some point I just gave up. (I'm mixing IDE with language/lib right now, but for Gnome it does go hand in hand IMHO)
merlijn_s 9y ago
With the flatpack integration, Builder really has the potential to become the Xcode for Linux. I hope that Ubuntu starts to support Builder. Ubuntu tried something similar with qtcreator and the Ubuntu sdk, but that was a really bad experience. Let's hope that the switch to Gnome also means that Ubuntu switch their efforts to Builder.
- rjzzleep 9y ago
  flatpack solves a deployment/distribution issue. distribution is irrelevant when you have nothing to distribute.
  - merlijn_s 9y ago
    The biggest issue is the distribution. One of the devs of the Minecraft Windows 10 edition said that it would be trivial to port that to desktop Linux but they would have to set up their own payment and distribution system, which just isn't worth it for that tiny market. Having packaging and distribution built into an IDE goes a great length to solve that issue.
    - voltagex_ 9y ago
      Except they could throw it on to Steam for Linux - it's a business decision not to put it on there and let Valve take 30%.
- dcgudeman 9y ago
  I hope so, but honestly I feel like they are trying to keep it too general. I was looking at some of the critical components like Glade (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glade_Interface_Designer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glade_Interface_Designer) and noticed this: Glade is programming language–independent, and does not produce code for events, but rather an XML file that is then used with an appropriate binding (such as GtkAda for use with the Ada programming language) Maybe Ada is more popular than I know, but I would think it's more valuable to spend time making the development process better for C++ devs (or w/e) than build a system so general that it can support Ada.
sjellis 9y ago
Red Hat have been sponsoring Christian Hergert (https://blogs.gnome.org/chergert/ https://blogs.gnome.org/chergert/) to work on Builder full-time for a while now, with a specific focus on Flatpak integration, and there are other contributors, including GSoC students working on specific features. The missing piece is public server infrastructure for accepting Flatpak packages from GNOME Builder and distributing them to GNOME Software clients, and that is currently in development as https://flathub.org/ https://flathub.org/
michaelmrose 9y ago
There are a multitude of different dev environments I don't think we need a new one that will probably have less effort invested than current popular environments.

hjek 9y ago

Racket is well documented, has a well working (if slightly heavy) IDE, and packages an app by running "raco exe" (Around 6.5 mb for a "HelloWorld". That could be worse.). And you can package for Windows just as easily using Wine. I've found the error messages of Racket very friendly also. It has never been easier to build GNU/Linux Desktop Apps. http://racket-lang.org/ http://racket-lang.org/ Extremely easy to do GUIs, and they have weird DSLs, for example for video editing and shell scripting: http://docs.racket-lang.org/video/index.html http://docs.racket-lang.org/video/index.html http://docs.racket-lang.org/rash/index.html http://docs.racket-lang.org/rash/index.html

ledgerdev 9y ago

> There is a lack of a simple desktop app development environment. Does anyone think that Xaml Standard + GTK + dotnet core might be a potential path forward? Supposedly Microsoft is working on a GTK implementation, and very much intrigues me. edit: Discussion here http://www.xamarinpodcast.com/41 http://www.xamarinpodcast.com/41 21:30 - New "backends" for Xamarin.Forms - macOS, GTK#, and WPF

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

tyingq 9y ago

Something of a dark horse for now, but there's Flutter. Maybe if it succeeds on mobile they'll add the missing desktop widgets.