What is the development status of MATE Desktop?

Development Discussion
1

Given the evident void of messaging that can reassure the Community of UbuntuMATE's "business continuity", I am enough of a realist to accept that it may not have a future. :frowning:

Let there be no mistake: I would be ECSTATIC to hear actual confirmation from Leadership otherwise ... and I pray that we will all hear such news in the near future!

Being resigned to accept the fact that such may not be the case, can someone who has authority make a statement in this forum regarding the "business continuity" status regarding the MATE Desktop itself?

I think the entire Community would be greatly relieved to hear a clear statement regarding development efforts having retrenched with a re-aligned focus returned to the more essential core, being the MATE Desktop itself, and ensuring that it continues, at the very least, to be accepted as part of the Ubuntu main repository.

I am sure many would prefer to hear that it would continue to be cross-compatible with multiple distros, but, again, I am a realist enough to recognize that keeping it fully integrated with one Distro is work enough, let alone multiple distros. That being the case, is Xubuntu the most compatible Flavour for a single integration, or is there a different Ubuntu-base "ISO" which would be a better "fit", in the sense that keeping the MATE Desktop functionality "intact" would be that much easier because of a shared GTK3 base?

May I solicit such a comment?

(@Wimpy , @vkareh , @monsta , @M.aD , @raveit65 , @lah7 , @guiverc )


Going out on the limb, is there a Nix-based build of MATE Desktop that we have not been made aware of? I can't speak for others, but I would be curious enough, and willing enough, to give that a spin, if I were offered the chance. :slight_smile: I just hope that I don't have to unlearn all the Unix/Linux shell commands in order to make that work.

Thank you ... for taking the time to consider my request and sharing a clear view on where things stand.

4 Likes
2

I'll respond partially, as I'm not involved with the MATE Desktop, and thus can't speak with authority/knowledge on that topic.

I was using Debian before the Ubuntu project even started (2004), and I've never stopped being a user there. Whilst I'm a Ubuntu users most of the time, I still use Debian, and it'll be on Debian (forky) where I've likely used MATE last I bet.

I also have a Fedora install here, and happily move files, and even desktop configs between my Ubuntu, Debian & Fedora installs without issue.. but I do try and keep them somewhat aligned timing wise (ie. I consider versions of software when I move stuff between them; but I keep those pretty aligned). The major difference I need to watch for when I move configs between my boxes isn't the base OS, but that whilst this Ubuntu box has 5 displays connected; my Debian & Fedora (or OpenSuSE) box only have two displays and even Debian & Fedora/OpenSuSE differ in alignment (Fedora & OpenSuSE are dual boot on same box so those two are identical); ie. that's a form factor difference issue I always need to adjust for.

I'd be happy using MATE on Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, OpenSuSE and others.. in fact do/have. The major differences between them are not the desktop (ie. not MATE), but support length (LTS etc), coverage of repository, release model (rolling, stable etc) and other stuff. One of the things I like about Ubuntu is it tends to be easier (whilst for me it's not far from Debian where I started in the 90s).

If you want a pure Ubuntu + MATE system; I'd probably start with Ubuntu Server and then add packages.

Xfce is progressing on their move to Wayland (releng:wayland_roadmap [Xfce Wiki]) and isn't perfectly aligned with the MATE desktop (in timing of move to Wayland), thus starting with an Xubuntu install could vary between releases if you plan on switching desktop metapackages.

I started using Ubuntu by always installing Ubuntu Desktop, as I could download that quota free, then by switching my mirror to one that was also quota free; I'd switch desktops by removing/installing the flavor metapackages and still not be at risk of my home internet flipping to dial up speeds when I hit my monthly [bandwidth] quota, so I'm very used to that. The major thing I discovered is that software changes over time, and thus if you do XY&Z with one release, doing the same XY&Z on another release (where metapackages have changed) may not result in a perfectly identical result. Where the packages were packaged by Debian+MATE for Debian release and for a Debian [LTS] release, don't forget that's in the odd year (vs. Ubuntu being April in the even year). ie. if you do something and it's perfect on say 24.04, whilst you may get the same result if you did the same on 26.04, you may not come 26.10 in the future, even if most things worked as expected. You would get more consistent results I believe if you started with a Ubuntu Server ISO & then added the MATE desktop if comparing 24.04, 26.04 & 26.10 being my point (as against Xubuntu or another flavor ISO).

As for your choice of Xubuntu - yes it would be the closest Ubuntu flavor in my own opinion too.

5 Likes
3

I was giving my opinion as to a target for the MATE Desktop development Team, not a target for my own "development".

As you may have seen from some of my other posts, I was, ("was" being underlined) looking at trying to build on Ubuntu Sever, but that has come to a grinding halt because I can't sort out the issue around Brisk Menu not being updated with new categories and launchers for newly installed Apps (i.e. Firefox).

The focus of this post was about what the Developers have as intended outlook going forward ... NOT what options I have available for me to entertain. I do that investigating on my own, all the time, but I am tired of working in a vacuum of information. Truly exhausted, mainly because I don't have the knowledge/experience of the software tools that were used to build Distros or the MATE Desktop. As can be seen with my postings, I have always tried to share the knowledge I harvested and refined into readily reusable form, and shared back with the community in the form of what I consider well-formed (meaningful variable names), well-structured (at least as best as I consider to make the code both readable and logical) and reusable (in the form of handy working scripts/programs/tools).

But that was not my focus with this topic of discussion.

I need this topic to be focused on a clarity of intent being communicated by the Development Team, especially its leadership, for the MATE Desktop.

I dearly hope that that will occur.


As for everything else you shared with us, I do appreciate the time and effort it took to communicate that to us. The information was not wasted. Thank you.

5 Likes
4

@ericmarceau I too have been thinking about this myself.

With each passing day it looks more than certain that Ubuntu MATE is done and at the same time there isn't much coming out of the MATE camp either and since the release of 1.28.2 there doesn't appear to be much happening on the development side of things (last blog entry was 2+ years ago).

With that being said it makes me wonder if any alternatives to Ubuntu MATE that would include the MATE DE are even worth pursuing in the long run IF there's no active development happening with MATE and if this is the case then eventually a few years down the road the apps included in 1.28 with eventually become outdated/unsupported as many have in 1.26.

I'm not in any way saying that the MATE DE is done as I have no first hand knowledge of any type and I'm simply speculating here. But with the lack of any communication the WHAT IF? bug is already in my head.

4 Likes
5

Thank you, Norm, for showing interest.

HOWEVER ... I don't want this topic to fall into the repeated pattern of opinion pieces shared by non-Development Team members.

We ALL need this to become a clearly communicated messaging, one way or the other, regarding MATE Desktop itself! Yes, I realize this is UbuntuMATE and not MATE Desktop, but UbuntuMATE was a vehicle to make UbuntuMATE truly shine, as it does, but going forward, the incompatibilities stemming from falling behind with integrating the upates of various libraries, will begin to show up as a "loss of shine", thenceforth translating into loss of comfort with the environment, trust it is performing as expected and, eventually, intent to depend on it going forward.

If MATE Desktop is to "fizzle out" and become part of the fabric of history past, that would be a crying shame for the "how" it ended up, undeservedly so, amongst the others that have found themselves on the trash heap.

I rarely beg, but PLEASE, doesn't the Community ... that has stood by the work of art and science that we have adopted as "our own"... deserve at least some clarity of intent going forward?

I have to say that this WILL be my final request on this topic!

I hope that it is worthy of a meaningful response.

Thank you for everything that you (the Development Team) have done for us over the years. It is very sincerely much appreciated!.

3 Likes
6

I posted on the Ubuntu Discourse

4 Likes
7

Thank you again for everything!

Sad but understandable, when priorities shift!

I wish you all the success in your other endeavours!

2 Likes
8

Yes all respect and thanks to those advancing things like U-Mate.
I am of the few which made $$ contribution… hope it hasn’t been lost.
I am on 24.04.4 on this production/work laptop - all is fine
I have 26.04 on a separate laptop and it does quite fine also
I’ll soon move full 26.04
Will stick around up to the point it forces me toward something else, i.e. unless what’s ‘under the hood’ prevents being efficient.
But Ubuntu is Ubuntu. Even Mint is Ubuntu… so if a Mate Desktop can be attached to it, I’ll be around.

W

4 Likes
9

Thanks Wimpy! I've been absolutely thrilled with the run I've had with Ubuntu MATE. It was so easy, familiar, and yet modern (when I started out with MATE), and helped me become a Linux-only user along the way. Thanks again and best of luck!

5 Likes
10

Thank you, Martin (@Wimpy) for a truly incredible body of work.

4 Likes
11

@Wimpy Thanks for everything you've done for this community and for the MATE desktop itself :heart:

@ericmarceau with regards to the upstream MATE Desktop itself, the team currently looks like this:

  • 3 developers working and communicating almost daily (basically the "admin" team)
  • 1-2 core developers occasionally helping with ad-hoc reviews and bug fixes
  • a handful of semi-regular contributors
  • assorted distro maintainers (I work regularly with the Fedora one, and have occasional comms with someone from OpenBSD)

Currently a lot of the discussions and admin work are centered around the following:

  • Continuous Integration: most pipelines are now cleaned up, goal is to increase confidence in our merge builds and releases
  • Release cadence: we're actively discussing this, but the idea is more frequent releases based on what gets actually committed, rather than heuristics like "it's been 2 years, maybe we should tag a new major version"
  • Translation: we've relied on a clunky closed-source system for years. The Fedora l10n team is helping us transition to an open source system they host to make things easier and more automated
  • Governance: how we make decisions. Instead of having a single project leader making all the important decisions, we've gotten to a point where we consult one another regularly, but at the same time trust one another to decide what's best for the project

And a lot of the actual software development is in these areas:

  • Wayland development: Goal is to get MATE to a good working state with Wayland by the time major distros start dropping X11 (assuming that ever happens)
  • GTK: Goal is to ensure we're not using deprecated APIs in GTK3, and in the worst case scenario prepare for a GTK4 migration (no one wants this, but we're actively thinking about the future here)
  • Backlog: Goal is to address all the papercuts users have been complaining about, sometimes for over a decade

I know MATE Desktop doesn't seem like it moves a lot, but just this month (March 2026) we've merged 129 commits across 41 repositories. About half of those are bug fixes and features, the other half are related to fixing pipelines, updating dependencies, and streamlining our build process.

12 Likes
12

Thank you VERY much, Victor, for that behind the scenes detailed update about the Development Team's activities and focus. It is MUCH appreciated and surely will reassure the Community regarding the sustainability of that DM going forward.

To be clear, for myself, I am not looking for any changes to the current MATE interraction. As far as I am concerned, everything is PURRRRRRFECT !!!

My only sideline concerns were mentions of migrating to a different build system, all at the same time as trying to evolve to a Wayland-based platform, again from the standpoint of "business continuity". I am quite prepared, given the approach by the Team regarding what are deemed baseline functionality to maintain, to leave the determination of what needs to adapt for future-proofing to the experts that know, namely people such as yourself.

Having said that, I am absolutely OK with how MATE is.

Just hoping that there are enough kind souls that see value in ensuring that it continues to be a strong offering, as a Desktop, among all the others.

If that is part of robuts ubuntuMATE going forward, that would be a FANTASTIC future!

If, on the other hand, MATE can only survive as one of the DM options that can be fully integrated into Ubuntu/Debian platforms, that too is fantastic, but would make it harder to attract newer adherents to MATE by not being the default DM at installation.

It would be much better to level the playing field by allowing the choice of DM at first install to include MATE as one of those default DMs.


I have to say that it is quite impressive to me, having seen the current list of backlog in bugs etc., that I honestly have not hit a single instance of a true "bug" that has affected me! So, from that standpoint, for me, MATE Desktop and UbuntuMATE have been perfect gems, as compared to others which have made me suffer in the past. Any bumps, that I have come across, have all been of my own misunderstanding in usage or configuration. NEVER broken functionality!

So, for me, the rating is 100% for both MATE and UbuntuMATE.

That seems like a good enough reason to want to push as hard as I can to see that they both survive, and thrive, as the future evolves!

6 Likes
13

Fair point. We're different developers in the team, with different concerns and expertise. The main goal with regards to builds is to decrease cognitive load around releases so we can focus on the "fun stuff". Honestly I just want to automate as much as possible so I can go back to making MATE better.

This is where things get dicey. I'm not involved in any distro - not even in Fedora (which is what I use). And there's currently no overlap between the upstream team and whoever packages MATE for distros. So Ubuntu MATE and Fedora MATE can both disappear and I would have no idea what to do about it...

Maybe this is a good time to mention that we have a public Matrix room: #mate-desktop-environment:matrix.org

7 Likes
14

I just remembered the name of that new build system: meson.


I guess it's my ignorance of how things are accomplished. I still don't understand why there needs to be a separate distro in order to make each Desktop Manager "shine".

I know it involves packages beyond the DM's own set, but I can't seem to visualize what those "missing" packages do beyond the DM ( and for me the DM includes those expected tools such as caja, pluma, etc. as listed in the GitHub site for MATE Desktop ), so for me it's a mystery. :slight_smile:

2 Likes
15

Ah, right. I don't know a whole lot about why we keep both. Legacy probably? Meson is faster than autotools, but we haven't adapted all repos yet... Also some distros may not have one or the other.

This is probably one of those "without a MATE distro, folks wouldn't find out about it". Not sure how I feel about it all yet.

I personally just install Fedora Workstation, compile all my MATE packages, remove a bunch of GNOME junk, then use that. But then again, my situation is different since I'm developing the thing itself.

Having MATE available as an option is tricky since it's not just a bunch of packages. There's also the session manager (which controls marco, the panel, caja) and a bunch of daemons for things like notifications, screen saver, etc. That all needs to integrate with things like systemd or XDG, or controlled by the session manager itself, depending on the distro.

Then there are dependencies, like if a distro has a specific version of GTK or something, whoever includes the MATE packages in the distro's manifest also needs to change how it's built or additional patches that are not upstream, etc.

The point is, unless you're building MATE from scratch yourself, someone needs to do it for you in a way that works for that distro. I don't even know who does that for most distros, to be honest. I should probably find out and keep a roster somewhere.

8 Likes