2 ms·

I am not saying don't be pissed off, I am saying please channel that energy to help to fix the underlying problems/attitudes. I can give suggestions on how to d

I am not saying don't be pissed off, I am saying please channel that energy to help to fix the underlying problems/attitudes. I can give suggestions on how to do this, if you're interested to hear it, so we can maybe have a chance to finally get some issues fixed. Beating the same dead horse going on years now is just not going to help this, regardless of what your perceptions of certain developer's attitudes are. If complaining about lost goodwill was ever a substitute for being persuasive and getting things done and taking initiative to restore the goodwill, it would have worked years ago, and we wouldn't be here talking about this now. And just to be clear, harassing developers who have said "no I don't want to work on feature XYZ" is never acceptable and never has good results. If somebody says no and is just not interested, we leave them alone and we find someone else who does want to work on that feature.

traverseda 6y ago
Alright, I want this type-ahead feature. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/nautilus/-/issues/244 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/nautilus/-/issues/244 Not having type-ahead, instead using gnome's search, makes GTK apps really annoying for me. Right now I have a solution that involves patching, but presuming that my ultimate goal is just that one concessions, just have a flag buried somewhere that would enable type-ahead instead of search, how do you suggest I get that done? I think that would go a long way towards demonstrating that gnome can be reasoned with, is worth even approaching or talking to. Could we hire a developer? Set up crowdfunding? Can someone give me a quote and I can see what resources I can bring to bear on the problem? I'd be open to other suggestions on how to channel that energy productively, but I really think if they can't compromise on that one feature that's important to a bunch of people then they're probably not going to be worth dealing with. Feel free to send me an email, at gmail.
- cycloptic 6y ago
  If you have a working patch for this that makes it a configurable option then just use that. There is no harm in submitting that as a merge request either, worst case it gets rejected again and you're in the same spot you are now. I don't believe a real non-intrusive patch was ever submitted for this, everything out there just seems to be a revert back to some old functionality that breaks other things. (Please don't waste maintainer time submitting patches that are broken or hacky, or patches that were already rejected. When in doubt talk about it with them first before submitting anything, and make sure your patch is actually new and addresses all the concerns that were made in the bug tracker already) If it does get rejected then you do the same thing you'd do with any other open source project: convince your distro to carry the patch. I think the key here is to just not lose sight of the goal which is to get enough support somewhere to have the patch maintained, if you don't care to become an upstream developer and work closely with them then you can skip that and just do the same process but only with a downstream that is relevant to you. If the patch still needs a lot of work/money to get it to the point where it's stable and doesn't break other things, well, now you know why upstream doesn't want to do it... so with that I would say a way to help would be to commit to maintaining this for however many years you expect to be using the patch. I can't give you a specific quote (I don't have any interest in working on this, sorry) but based on average developer rates you probably should expect to spend at least a few thousand dollars on this total, over several years of maintenance time, if you are not the one who is going to be writing the code. Of course, you can reduce the burden on yourself by getting a distro to share the cost, which is why I suggested that first :)
  - traverseda 6y ago
    >When in doubt talk about it with them first before submitting anything Normally you'd do that before even working on the patch, and you can see what kind of response that's gotten. I've got a patched version that suites my needs, as I say. That being said I'm sure raising a few thousand dollars for that feature wouldn't have been hard.
    - cycloptic 6y ago
      >you can see what kind of response that's gotten I don't think we have. Like I said, I have not seen any serious offers to work on a non-intrusive patch for this, to put up the time and/or money and to maintain it for the number of years required. That's what you want to look for. And if you want to bring it upstream, you have to sell it to them in a way that shows it will not increase their maintenance burden or break the currently in-place designs. (This is not a GNOME specific thing, this is how basically every open source project operates. You generally can't just dump code on upstream and expect it to go well) If you want to do fundraising, some trusted person has to put in the time to do it and to manage the money.

traverseda 6y ago

Alright, I want this type-ahead feature. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/nautilus/-/issues/244 https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/nautilus/-/issues/244 Not having type-ahead, instead using gnome's search, makes GTK apps really annoying for me. Right now I have a solution that involves patching, but presuming that my ultimate goal is just that one concessions, just have a flag buried somewhere that would enable type-ahead instead of search, how do you suggest I get that done? I think that would go a long way towards demonstrating that gnome can be reasoned with, is worth even approaching or talking to. Could we hire a developer? Set up crowdfunding? Can someone give me a quote and I can see what resources I can bring to bear on the problem? I'd be open to other suggestions on how to channel that energy productively, but I really think if they can't compromise on that one feature that's important to a bunch of people then they're probably not going to be worth dealing with. Feel free to send me an email, at gmail.

cycloptic 6y ago
If you have a working patch for this that makes it a configurable option then just use that. There is no harm in submitting that as a merge request either, worst case it gets rejected again and you're in the same spot you are now. I don't believe a real non-intrusive patch was ever submitted for this, everything out there just seems to be a revert back to some old functionality that breaks other things. (Please don't waste maintainer time submitting patches that are broken or hacky, or patches that were already rejected. When in doubt talk about it with them first before submitting anything, and make sure your patch is actually new and addresses all the concerns that were made in the bug tracker already) If it does get rejected then you do the same thing you'd do with any other open source project: convince your distro to carry the patch. I think the key here is to just not lose sight of the goal which is to get enough support somewhere to have the patch maintained, if you don't care to become an upstream developer and work closely with them then you can skip that and just do the same process but only with a downstream that is relevant to you. If the patch still needs a lot of work/money to get it to the point where it's stable and doesn't break other things, well, now you know why upstream doesn't want to do it... so with that I would say a way to help would be to commit to maintaining this for however many years you expect to be using the patch. I can't give you a specific quote (I don't have any interest in working on this, sorry) but based on average developer rates you probably should expect to spend at least a few thousand dollars on this total, over several years of maintenance time, if you are not the one who is going to be writing the code. Of course, you can reduce the burden on yourself by getting a distro to share the cost, which is why I suggested that first :)
- traverseda 6y ago
  >When in doubt talk about it with them first before submitting anything Normally you'd do that before even working on the patch, and you can see what kind of response that's gotten. I've got a patched version that suites my needs, as I say. That being said I'm sure raising a few thousand dollars for that feature wouldn't have been hard.
  - cycloptic 6y ago
    >you can see what kind of response that's gotten I don't think we have. Like I said, I have not seen any serious offers to work on a non-intrusive patch for this, to put up the time and/or money and to maintain it for the number of years required. That's what you want to look for. And if you want to bring it upstream, you have to sell it to them in a way that shows it will not increase their maintenance burden or break the currently in-place designs. (This is not a GNOME specific thing, this is how basically every open source project operates. You generally can't just dump code on upstream and expect it to go well) If you want to do fundraising, some trusted person has to put in the time to do it and to manage the money.