Mageia Control Center = Best settings manager ever?

[rolltide101x]

I have used most every Linux in the book and I have not found anything in any other distro as comprehensive and helpful as Mageia Control Center. (Idk if Mandriva has something similar though. One of the few I never used) I just wanted to thank the Mageia developers for this and ask everyone else's opinion on the subject.

[alf]

well, as Mageia is a fork of Mandriva the MCC comes in origin from Mandriva and was state of the art there over years.

[dave]

in future versions of mageia there are plans to change the MCC or to make a port to QML/QT?

[wobo]

There have been plans for a long time (even back at Mandriva) but as with many of such plans this also depends on the available contributors with the necessary skills and time. Maybe such one will come up tonight or tomorrow or never.

[alf]

Seems to be that Mandriva is on the way to integrate the MCC into KDE-Systemsetting. There are already 2 modules (systemservices and user/group-administration) not official but for testing in KDE-Systemsettings.

[PiElle]

In any case, MCC is a very useful piece of software ...
The best control center available in a Linux system ...

[dubigrasu]

The best control center available in a Linux system ...

Let's be fair, Suse's Yast is similarly good.

Seems to be that Mandriva is on the way to integrate the MCC into KDE-Systemsetting.

You know, I'm not sure if I want to see that. PCLinuxOS done that few releases ago and kinda suck, it was confusing and redundant. Eventually they ditched the whole thing.
It would imply a whole lot of work for nothing. It's obviously that MCC will not go away (there is also Gnome etc in this world) so why the same set of controls in two places? Imagine the confusion for a newbie.
I think that they should remain as they are, MCC with system wide settings and KDE with their own, not overlapping each other.

[rolltide101x]

MCC reminds me alot of Windows control panel (which is a very good thing). Yast is detailed but not to the degree of MCC. Its the 1st time in any Linux distro I felt I had a useful settings manager. In most Linux distros you have to go to 100 different places to get stuff done but Mageia puts most of the important things in one place and leaves out the smaller things to get in and out more quickly. I do agree though that things should stay the same. No sense in making things any more difficult for newbies (or even ourselves for that matter)

[dave]

You know, I'm not sure if I want to see that. PCLinuxOS done that few releases ago and kinda suck, it was confusing and redundant. Eventually they ditched the whole thing.
It would imply a whole lot of work for nothing. It's obviously that MCC will not go away (there is also Gnome etc in this world) so why the same set of controls in two places? Imagine the confusion for a newbie.
I think that they should remain as they are, MCC with system wide settings and KDE with their own, not overlapping each other.

I am using PCLinuxOS right now and I can assure that its control center does not have anything wrong. Secondly, do not say to remove the old MCC written with GTK, which you can use gtk-based versions, but I say rewrite the same MCC with qt/QML. In a KDE desktop this would lead to better integration, better performance and better looking. Then among other things, if we find something confusing, then I'll take the example of the package manager mageia (drakrpm) usability is something that borders on zero. Mandriva has understood and is developing the new "Mandriva Application Manager" (written with qt/qml). Mageia if he wants to make a different at all costs could at least implement apper. So no one says you have two control centers in the same installation, simply if you download the kde version you find qt-MCC, if you download the gnome version you find gtk-MCC. Too easy?

[dubigrasu]

I am using PCLinuxOS right now and I can assure that its control center does not have anything wrong.

I don't remember saying something like that.
What I said is that once upon a time in the past they did integrate the tools from PCLinuxOS control Center in KDE4 system settings.

Then among other things, if we find something confusing, then I'll take the example of the package manager mageia (drakrpm) usability is something that borders on zero.

There are some things that can be definitely improved concerning drakrpm, yes.
But to say that its usability borders to zero, that's not true. Not at all.

[doktor5000]

Secondly, do not say to remove the old MCC written with GTK, which you can use gtk-based versions, but I say rewrite the same MCC with qt/QML. In a KDE desktop this would lead to better integration, better performance and better looking.

Why do i always read about rewriting something? If at all, it needs a QT frontend, as there's already GTK and Ncurses frontends, but no rewrite.
A rewrite would just uselessly add on duplication, which would be a bad thing. Also rewriting it in QML does not magically improve
it's performance, that is just a bogus claim.

[wobo]

By all means: keep system related settings out of a desktop environment setting tool, no matter whether KDE or Gnome!
1. If you integrate a tool into KDE and/or Gnome system settings and remove it from MCC - all non KDE/Gnome users will lose.
2. If you integrate a tool into KDE and/or Gnome system settings without removing it from MCC we have a redundancy which will lead to unnecessary confusion and forum questions. That's the situation we have already, there are tools in the KDE system settings which do not belong there. Unfortunately unexperienced users trying to solve a problem will make changes in both systems and (in the worst case) end up with an unstable system.

As the doktor wrote - if all you are concerned with is the optical integration into the KDE look, there's no need to rewrite anything. Just make a QT frontend which has the same functionality as the GTK frontend.

[dave]

As the doktor wrote - if all you are concerned with is the optical integration into the KDE look, there's no need to rewrite anything. Just make a QT frontend which has the same functionality as the GTK frontend.

was just what I meant.

[doktor5000]

You may want to check this thread: viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1528