Skip navigation.

The future of Galeon

Galeon
Galeon

Philip Langdale wrote: "Tommi, Crispin and I were all able to attend the GNOME summit last
weekend, even though Crispin had to pay his own way :-) So, it was
a good opportunity for us to sit down and discuss the future of Galeon.
All of us are very much working fulltime which limits the extent to
which we can hack on Galeon and the amount of activity you've observed
speaks for itself.

As such, we've reached the conclusion that we have to change our
approach if we're going to avoid Galeon getting stale or bit-rotting;
which is important for all of us, as we all use Galeon because we
still think it's the best thing out there :-)

So, what does changing our approach mean? It means considering Epiphany
in a new light; Galeon still does a lot of things, small and large, that
Epiphany either doesn't do or doesn't do as well, but at the same time,
there are some areas where they've moved in front, and most importantly
Epiphany has a bunch of active maintainers who are handling the things
that we struggle to do for Galeon. But you say: Epiphany doesn't fit
my needs or I'd be using it already! True, so our proposal is to bring
Galeon to Epiphany.

Epiphany has a powerful extensions mechanism that exposes many of the
core structures of the program and there is a general willingness to
expose more as necessary. This means that many galeon features can be
recast as extensions, and Crispin has already done this for a couple
of things: the sidebar is now in epiphany-extensions and he's got a
few more hidden away such as in-browser view-source. Also don't forget
that some other features have been independently ported as extensions
already, such as the javascript console.
There are a few galeon features which are hard to implement as
extensions and/or are of a class that makes them desirable within the
base Epiphany package, and these should be directly ported. I've already
made a couple of checkins to port back/forward history copying and
middle-clicking on history entries.

Between these two approaches and the more pragmatic direction that
epiphany is moving in these days (heirarchical bookmark support has
just been checked in!), I believe that we can reach a point where
Epiphany + a set of extensions will provide the same functionality that
Galeon does today.

This seems an optimal solution for everyone; it allows us, the galeon
developers, to avoid duplicating work with epiphany team, it will allow
users to leverage the best from both browsers and most importantly, it
puts galeon on a much firmer footing for the future that is not so much
at the mercy of our ability to find time to hack on it.

I hope that this sounds like a good long term strategy to everyone, but
if you do find yourself recoiling from it, do realise that the current
approach is unsustainable and will almost certainly result in galeon
becoming unmaintained or falling too far behind in some areas, meaning
that you'll be struggling to keep using it anyway.

This process will probably take some time given our other commitments,
so we intend to make a formal 2.0 galeon release (long overdue really)
and keep that compiling against newer releases of mozilla, but our
efforts will be directed towards this extension project.

Of course, anybody who wants to help out, either with the extensions
or with maintaining the current galeon codebase, is more than welcome!

I've added a wiki page at: http://live.gnome.org/Epiphany_2fGaleonIssues
which lists current stuff I can think of. I encourage anyone to add
anything that I've missed, but if you want to list a Galeon 1.2 feature
please categorise it separately :-)"

Also for those who would like more information about the new Epiphany bookmarks system, this page gives a detailed overview.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Wish they had done this to begin with.....

....then we wuold have ended up with the better name. I always thought Galeon was a great name. It began with a 'G', like GNOME and a galeon is a ship, like the Galeon browser being a ship to travel the world-wide web.

Paul

Tabs on left or right... by Anonymous George

tab position

A handful lines of python code in the Python console will put the Epiphany tabs on whichever side you prefer. Unfortunately I don't know them from the top of my head, drop by on irc #epiphany and ask :)

You got it backwards.... by Anonymous George

web menu

I hope galeon's web menu will make it into epiphany. This is one thing that keeps me on galeon instead of firefox. It is great to be able to change cookie and popup settings directly from the menu instead of going through your filters in the prefs.

Time to give kazehakase a whirl? by Anonymous George

As long as they import two

As long as they import two features:

1) Ability to create menu hierarchies in the bookmarks
2) An address bar with a drop down text field

hierarchical bookmarks *do* exist already

> 1) Ability to create menu hierarchies in the bookmarks

If you add a topic like "Foo->Bar", it will be traversed into Foo/Bar. '/' was not picked as separator because it created Problems with existing topics like "Math/Physics". RTFM you power users :).

* Print dialogs * File type

* Print dialogs
* File type associations
* Feel
* Release cycle in sync with gnome
* Simple gettext based translation like all other gnome apps
* Take notice of gnome font settings
* Follow gnome theme for icons in the menus, most don't have icons, bookmarks have some folder icon that doesn't match, and a file icon that doesn't match (history sidebar the same problem), toolbar icons buttons don't follow the theme
* The location bar is clearly not a gtk widget just looking at the dropdown history button
* Form controls have to have their look hardcoded to match a specific gtk theme.
* back / forward toolbar buttons do not match gtk ones with the history drop down arrow. (just like other option buttons, e.g. View in the history sidebar)
* tree views aren't gtk ones either, in preferences, history sidebar etc.
* a lovely unHIGified preferences dialog.

Galeon / Epiphany sort these out, other than form controls in pages.

Bookmarks by Anonymous George

text history

There is laundry list of similar stupid "features" like removing the text history that epiphany has been guilty of.

Despite the fact that the flamebait nature of your post doesn't warrant a serious reply really, this remark intrigues me. Maybe it's because I've been using Epiphany since < 1.0 but I cannot for the life of me imagine what you could mean by 'removing the text history'. Care to clarify?

> > "2) An address bar with

> > "2) An address bar with a drop down text field"

> This is a perfect example of the insane wrong-headedness of epiphany
> developers that has limited its adoption since the beginning

Why? You can visit the recent locations right after pressing ctrl-h or through the go menu (ctrl-g). It's way better in terms of keynav, and power users are meant to use keynav.

Galeon is a good browser

I've been ussing galeon for 5 or 6 years. I've try firebird, firefox, mozilla, epiphany, etc. and I think galeon is still the best. Kudos for all developers for this wonderful program. Bad news if galeon disapears :-(.

galeon and ephiphany are both marginalised nowadays.

The days when Galeon/Epiphany had a major mindshare lie in a distant past nowadays. Those were the days when a big fat mozilla hog was the only browser availabe, lacking proper integration into the GNOME desktop, proper Gtk theme support and so forth. At that time the Galeon paradigma "A browser is a browser" was revolutionary. I loved Galeon for that reason: It was fast, it attempted to delegate all other tasks (mail, news, downloads etc) to other GNOME apps.

Furthermore Galeon was the first browser with decent tabbed browsing (Yes, I know Opera had something like that even earlier, but it was not really the same, it was MDI.) They added lots of clever features everywhere, you could right-click just about anywhere in the program and discover something useful.

Unfortunately this changed quite a bit with the port to Gtk/GNOME 2. Lots of useful stuff was dropped, and I personally never got reconciled with this.

Nowadays, most desktop oriented distros use firefox by default, even though Epiphany is GNOME's official browser. Notably, an Ubuntu user will never meet with Epiphany in the first place. Firefox integrates already nicely into GNOME (Gnome-VFS, Gtk themes and in the near future, probably printing, too), much better than Mozilla ever did, even better than the last version of Epiphany I tested (printing broken, no GNOME-VFS). It has many of the feature which once made Galeon unique.

I have been using Galeon for a number of years, but later I converted to Firem{bird,fox}, as said above, Galeon had mostly lost its appeal with the port to Gtk 2. I tested Epiphany briefly, but it never really convinced me. I assume that many others have gone a similar path.

FireFox still lacks proper

FireFox still lacks proper integration. theme for form controls is hard coded. the look of gtk is copied ok, but the feel of gtk isn't (mouse wheel over a horizontal scrollbar doesn't scroll it for example, nor do submenus behave like gtk)

Non american english versions require a separate build, not nice simple translation like the rest of gnome, this is an area where epiphany and galeon excel. 1 build to manage, easy for translaters to work with.

Epiphany works fine with gnome-vfs methods and has done for a long time.

It is a real shame Ubuntu didn't go with Epiphany over FireFox, same with the other distros.

No separate builds required...

Non american english versions require a separate build, not nice simple translation like the rest of gnome,

That's not true. My language environment is de_DE.UTF-8, I occasionally use other such as ru_RU-KOI8-R or fr_FR.UTF-8, all with the same build.

You can add support for a particular language either through installing the appropriate xpi extension, or (that's the way I prefer), when you are on Debian/Ubuntu you install mozilla-firefox-[lang]-[Country], these packages contain the localisation and are typically tiny. You can have as many l10n packages installed at the same time as you like and the start script uses your environment to determine which localisation should be used.

So, once those packages are installed, Debian/Ubuntu firefox behaves in a multilingual environment just like a gettext localised app. Of course, this is an extra step, but most people are fine with it.

And, well, firefox isn't the only app which diverts i18n files into seperate packages. Think of KDE, for instance.

but these xpis are not

but these xpis are not available with the releases of firefox, they are always delayed and I may be wrong, but old translations from previous versions can't be used with newer versions of firefox?

yes they are

Most languages are available at the time of releases.
Firefox's main releases (as will be next 1.5) are and will have all translations available at the time of release.

Delays that happen with minor releases usually take no longer than 24 hours to be released.

Personally, I'd really rather see more help going into helping firefox, you see needs, why not help?
Most end users want firefox.

help

As a matter of fact the Epiphany maintainer spends a lot of time writing patches for Mozilla. This benefits Epiphany, but Firefox and other Mozilla derevatives as well.

Most the languages. delays.

Most the languages. delays. I assume I was correct that translations for previous builds don't work, even if there aren't any string changes?

Why don't I help? Because my view point is that Firefox is misguided, that they put too much work into it instead of Gecko itself and for actual browsers efforts are better going into epiphany, camino, kmelon(?) etc.

Most end users want to browse web pages.

You are not most users.

And have no means to know what they want.

Not a shame

I hear these comments again and again....why didn't blah blah use Epiphany over Firefox??? BECAUSE USERS LIKE AND USE FIREFOX, THATS WHY. Ubuntu listens to users and makes a distro that users WANT to RUN, not MODIFY.

What do you think would be the first piece of code 99% of Ubuntu users would download in your world? Firefox! And then they would use it as their browser because THIS IS WHAT THEY WANT.

The target audience for Epiphany isn't even a rounding error on the Firefox userbase. Firefox integrates with gtk "enough" for most users. Users care about RUNNING THEIR EXTENSIONS, not gnome compliance.

The Gnome community is totally in La-La land on this one.

The error in your thinking

The error in your thinking is that you assume that Firefox is meant to be an integrated GNOME browser, which it is not. Sure it tries to integrate in the sense that it looks similar, losely follows the HIG and uses GNOME libraries where possible, but that's as far as it gets. It is _not_ an integrated part of the desktop and it's unfortunately not meant to be.

Even the Mozilla foundation seems to agree that a cross platform browser which happens to run on a certain platform is not the same as a real native browser. Otherwise, why would they endorse Camino for OS X? Galeon is like the Camino of GNOME and Epiphany is like the Safari of GNOME.

no error by Anonymous George

Why should you use a native browser?

Because some people prefer them.

At least on my computer, Galeon and Epiphany start faster than Firefox, and are generally more responsive. Further, they recognize my themes by default; I don't have to install a GNOME theme, then install a Firefox theme.

But more importantly, the fact that they are focused on certain desktops means they can integrate platform-specific features which Firefox, which is more general-purpose, cannot. Firefox can only do so much in the way of using GNOME features before it takes away from their development on other systems; Epiphany and Galeon have no such limitations. Even acknowledging their smaller developer pools and smaller userbase, the market is clearly there; we wouldn't be having this discussion otherwise.

Well, one day.. by Anonymous George

Ah ok, that again. I

Ah ok, that again. I accidentally thought you were making a new argument.

time to integrate? Galeon

time to integrate? Galeon and Epiphany are the ones that do this with Gnome.

99% of users will not

99% of users will not install any extensions. Those that do will be perfectly capable of installing firefox themselves.

Epiphany is the gnome browser, as such gnome desktops should be using it. As it currently stands having Epiphany installed requires Firefox be installed anyway (still no GRE) so it isn't any extra to download.

I also feel pretty safe saying gnome users care more about a browser that fits in 100% with their desktop.

99% of users will not by Anonymous George

Honestly, I'm probably new

Honestly, I'm probably new to linux and gnome but...
In what ways doesnt Firefox not perfectly integrate with Gnome?
I have Ubuntu and I dont see anything wrong with Firefox... other than it's icon, I'd rather it be the original one (less integration I guess).

Wild suggestion by Anonymous George
500000? by Anonymous George
rewriting by Anonymous George
"OK maybe my wording is not by Anonymous George

It sure sounds logical

Kudos to the Galeon developers for this decision. It's a great sign of maturity, and a further demonstration of the soundness of the open source method of software developing.

rehdon

Heirarchical bookmark doesn't make sense

I think it is a good thing that Galeon features are ported to Epiphany's extensions.

I have used Galeon from version 0.6 or something like that can changed to Firefox around version 1.2 of Galeon. Galeon sure was a great browser with tabs!!!

Anyway heirarchical bookmark doesn't make sense. Epiphany's straight bookmark approach is simple and fast, and it makes you be more selecttive about what to bookmark and waht to call the bookmark.

I have emulated the effect in Firefox. See screenshot.

I assume it will be

I assume it will be optional, like the hierarchical bookmarks in Safari. I don't have a problem with that if it makes people happy and it also simplifies importing or sharing bookmarks with other browsers.

Personally, after a long time of using Epiphany I came to the conclusion that I only really use bookmarks as shortcuts on my bookmarks toolbar. For everything else I prefer Google. So for me, an even simpler system would be ideal, where each bookmark can only exist in one topic (as in Safari). That would make adding and especially managing bookmarks more convenient for me. Also context menus for bookmarks inside topics on the bookmarks bar would be extremely useful.

I agree. Bookmarks like they

I agree. Bookmarks like they are handled today, no matter if they are hierarchical or tagged, are not very effective.
Especially when you get a huge list of bookmarks, you either waste your time putting them into the right categories/folder, or you waste your time finding them later on. "Where the hell did I put that bookmark for site x ?"

Right now I shorten/clean up the bookmark title to something sensitive and then use epi's adress entry and hope it "guesses" what I want. I never use the bookmark menu.

I hope someday my bookmarks get tagged automatically. Maybe use some service like del.icio.us and associate the most popular tags for a site.