Please don't rewrite history. There was a usability hackfest in England to decide on what the desktop should look like. Canonical designers didn't agree with th

Please don't rewrite history. There was a usability hackfest in England to decide on what the desktop should look like. Canonical designers didn't agree with the GNOME designers and went off to do their own thing though didn't really communicate much (never said they'd go their own way). This was way before GNOME 3.0 was released. I have no clue who you mean with "they scream". You mean GNOME contributors? Then again on history: Canonical committed to developing Wayland. Then changed direction, didn't communicate and came out with Mir 6 months later. This included all kinds of incorrect statements plus left out that they committed to develop some things for Wayland. The backlash has been documented many times, was pretty logical, was not limited to GNOME and mostly: it could've been avoided! I quite appreciate Canonical, but there's a fair bit of "wtf" that went on over the years. You seem to like speaking on GNOME's behalf; you're so terribly incorrect that I ask you to stop it. Further, mjg59 doesn't do much at GNOME. In his own words: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/membership-committee/2014-May/msg00016.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/membership-committee/2014-Ma.... Now on Unity: to package Unity for many years you had to apply lots of big patches to various other components. Unity was pretty much a Ubuntu-only thing and not meant to be shared easily across distributions (I asked).