Lumina Desktop | Hacker News Reader

Lumina Desktop

lumina-desktop.org

77 pointsrelaxitup29 comments

From the FAQ:

How is it different from other desktop environments?

> Designed to work best with TrueOS®, but specifically works very well for the BSD community at large. Lumina® can also be easily ported to any OS, including Linux distros).

> Does not require any of the commonly-used desktop implementation frameworks (DBUS, policykit, consolekit, systemd, HALD, etc..).

> Does not come bundled with any "end-user" applications (web browsers, email clients, multimedia software, office suites, etc..). The only utilities that Lumina brings to the table by default are the ones written specifically for the project and are generally for background/utilitarian functionality (the largest utility is the file manager).

> Simple text-based configuration file for setting system-wide defaults for new users. This allows distributors of the desktop to easily pre-set the system defaults/interface so it just works for the end user.

> Plugin-based interface design. This allows the user to make the desktop as light/heavy as desired (within reason) simply by choosing which plugins to have running on their desktop/panels.

> Designed to function as a general-purpose system interface - easily pre-configured to run on any type/size of device or screen.

Does anyone who uses it in practice care to comment? I'm curious how it plays in actual use.

I used a previous version for a month. It was clunky, but functional. The font rendering had issues, though I understand that has improved in newer versions, which I have not tried.

I find this an list amusingly technology obsessed. I notice none of these points mention the actual GUI or desktop, or any of it's features :)

Well yes, if you want to look at features then you'd look at the features page: https://lumina-desktop.org/features/

It's in the same dropdown list that lists the FaQ page.

Thats because most of those expects some kind of linux-isms to be present. Lumina is by BSD for BSD, and thus, perhaps ironically, works even on Linux.

> Does not come bundled with any "end-user" applications (web browsers, email clients, multimedia software, office suites, etc..). The only utilities that Lumina brings to the table by default are the ones written specifically for the project and are generally for background/utilitarian functionality (the largest utility is the file manager).

If this is the case, I wonder why the banner on https://lumina-desktop.org/ has a link to "Development Preview: lumina-mediaplayer" (https://lumina-desktop.org/1-3-0-development-preview-lumina-...)?

As advanced as this might be technically - visually it looks horrible. Do they don't have designer?

IMO, no thanks.

When designers moved into Gnome and KDE, they effectively crapified.

I'll contend that they need "good" designers. And maybe not a team.

Sometimes the result of one opinionated designer far exceeds the democratic team model (which tends to rely on the charisma of one vs. vision and skill).

I think those types of designers tend not to get too interested in design entire OS interfaces, however.

To me this is strikingly beautiful, compared to gnome and kde overkilled interface

Even the wallpaper is ugly and looks like some 00s renders.

It's good to see an OS-agnostic desktop environment that isn't tied to any particular framework.

Indeed, though as I understand it, Lumina still bundles a file manager. How necessary is this? I don't have a good understanding of how e.g. Nautilus integrates into things like the file save dialog for Chrome.

That feels like basic functionality to me. You need a way to open programs/files at least.

Yes, but why does the WM need to provide it? Everyone has preferences - pick your own.

As has been pointed out already, the headlined item is named Lumina Desktop Environment, not Lumina window manager.

The window manager is Fluxbox.

The alternative would be to bundle a terminal, I think - a window manager that doesn't offer a way to run programs, is a window manager that fails as an interface.

In X11, there is a big difference between a "window manager" and a "desktop environment".

Is Lumina different from say Xfce in this regard ?

Does anyone know how this compares to configuring Openbox? (and adding things like desktop icons, background image, conky, panel, etc)? From the perspective of a *nix power user, of course.

I already get my level of desired configuration through Openbox (with other programs), and retaining the benefit of idling at less than 450mb RAM usage and not having any unwanted components.

I think lumina is based on Fluxbox, which is very similar to openbox. Lumina isn't a currently window manager, it you wouldn't compare it dirrectly. Think of it as openbox plus a a start-menu and system tools like a network manager.

I say it "isn't a currently window manager" because the devs have said they are looking at making their own, but I haven't heard that they have started.

And the website appears to be toast, at least from my end. Cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:xgh1nx...

Cache of frontpage that's not down, from ~30 seconds ago: https://web.archive.org/web/20170507072845/https://lumina-de...

alt-cache http://archive.is/https://lumina-desktop.org/

F-Secure is currently blocking it as a "Harmful web site", also.

Website is down. Additional information on Github: https://github.com/trueos/lumina

A good reason to suggest that projects also keep screenshots on their GitHub repositories.

In theory it sounds very good to me. Site is down but overall idea is very sound. Don't give me more then I apsolutely need and let me take what I really need.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com