3 ms·

For everyone linking the JWZ "I Told You So" post, the devs are aware of it and posted a response in the GitHub issue. I encourage everyone to read their side o

• sbierwagen 6y ago
  What context? Reading that issue, the content seems to be: 1: jwz says if you add accessibility features to a text box, make sure they don't have any bugs that can kill a process, since that will break screen lockers 2: Cinnamon adds a buggy accessibility feature to a text box that lets you crash the screen locker 3: Github user clefebvre says something along the lines of "why is jwz being so negative >:(" Well... you did exactly what he told you not to do. If you're going to add accessibility features to a text box, you need to not screw it up. If you screw it up, then it breaks the screen locker for every user in the world, including the 99% of people who will never use the accessibility features. If you make an obvious, stupid mistake, people will make fun of you. Complaining that people are making fun of you won't do much. Try, instead, to not make the obvious stupid mistake? From the issue: >With that said, I have on message for JWZ. Don't be that guy. It's too easy to just tell people no to cross the street. Work with us on building that safest path. Huh? What? He wrote xscreensaver 20 years ago. He's supposed to fix buggy code written by other people until he dies? Why is it his responsibility to fix your code? The distro extended his program, the extension broke. You can either ignore the problem, remove the extension, or fix the extension. None of these things sounds like xscreensaver's problem!
  • Qub3d 6y ago
    > Why is it his responsibility to fix your code? The distro extended his program, the extension broke. cinnamon-screensaver (the repo this discussion is pertinent to) is written from scratch. The commenter's intent here is to suggest that JWZ has valid criticisms, but he has voiced them before and his latest blog post doesn't add anything to the discussion. This blog post, which links to the issue, creates additional overhead for the project to deal with. Just like this HN link does. I think its fair for us to give them a voice in the matter if we're showing the discussion to everyone. It would be nice to assume people read the entire discussion but clearly, that is not a reality.
    • eesmith 6y ago
      "written from scratch", though it does contain xscreensaver code written by jwz ... and with a copyright changed from BSD to GPL - https://github.com/linuxmint/cinnamon-screensaver/blob/master/libcscreensaver/cs-auth-pam.c https://github.com/linuxmint/cinnamon-screensaver/blob/maste... . The commit is at https://github.com/linuxmint/cinnamon-screensaver/commit/38a626d1a3c64736f0acfe22b39aaefbf1c206f4#diff-1d211bb7f7cb77bfcb4484f9f330462ec846935764870a1f6c8c840f3c26e14b https://github.com/linuxmint/cinnamon-screensaver/commit/38a... where mtwebster writes: > We'll use the old screensaver auth code instead - this ports gs-auth-pam.c and gs-auth.h from the old screensaver,
    • troff 6y ago
      Even with their voice in the matter, the voice is speaking nonsense and trying to snow the reader (as your response seems to indicate. And that's being charitable and assuming you're sincere). Giving that voice oxygen is making the matter worse. Cinnamon tried to re-invent the wheel. They made it very sparkly and shiny and colourful and forgot that it had to be robust, round and capable of rolling. Jesus wept, you criticise other people for not reading the entire discussion, and yet you somehow missed the part in JWZ's post where he explains that Cinnamon-screensaver was NOT written from scratch. So congratulations, you hypocritically own-goaled yourself there too. Which again, makes me question the charitability of assuming sincerity. And JWZ is supposed to "work with them" when their code fouls up for the Nth time? No, the idiots should've been writing modules for JWZ's engine, seeing as JWZ's is the one that a) they did indeed steal from and b) still screwed up. Yes, he's voiced his valid criticisms before. And the damn Cinnamon tards STILL KEEP MAKING THE SAME MISTAKES. This adds to the discussion. It adds useful, educational history that the Cinnamon morons are so stupid that they repeatedly, in the face of history, keep making the same goddamn stupid mistakes. I get to "the other side of the road" just fine with JWZ's screensaver. I just FIFTEEN MINUTES AGO had to step the housemate through replacing her new Mint install's Cinnamon screensaver with xscreensaver; because what a surprise, it's 2021 and the $hitpile that is Cinnamon screensaver lock would NOT RESPOND to keyboard or mouse and wouldn't let her log in. And either she had to either magic-sysrq, or I had to ssh in to the root account to kill the stupid pile of crap that is cinnamon-screensaver. And I found this ridiculous comment on this thread, because I was trying to show her a reference as to WHY Cinnamon-screensaver is stupidly broken in its principles and why xscreensaver should be used instead. Clement Lefebvre has some pretty big balls to have written what he did; and that's good. Because it'll make it easier to repeatedly kick him in them as he deserves for this. And defence of his positions is... not particularly defensible. I don't wish to be rude to you; but I finally stopped lurking on HN after years and created an account for the purpose of telling you these things. And by years, I mean that my Slashdot ID is in the 500,000s, rather than say the 60-millions.
  • rodgerd 6y ago
    > Don't be that guy. Pretty rich from someone who starts with "I'll fight him in a cage match"