6 ms·

Gnome doesn't want thousands of developers implementing their own visions for their projects and others don't want to donate their time to implementing gnomes v

Gnome doesn't want thousands of developers implementing their own visions for their projects and others don't want to donate their time to implementing gnomes vision. The proper thing for them all to do is all implement their own visions and people to use or work on what they please. Nobody asks why Tesla, Ford, and Toyota are wasting everyone's resources by being different company. Nobody suggests having different car manufacturers is paralyzing. Nobody opines that once the perfect car is invented we can just deprecate the rest because those would all be silly positions. The car market and computer uis are an evolving multidimensional entities whose evolving product lines are and have been dependant upon many parties pulling in different directions. It's like looking at only a duck and a pond and asking why the universe couldn't have just made a duck because it would be an ideal choice for that place and time. Of course it couldn't possibly work like that because arriving at that exact solution without intermediate steps would be impossible and besides the duck is no good in the desert or tundra. Also gnome is so flawed in so many ways from leaking memory due to unfixable mismatch between js and compiled code, to nonsensical handling of multiple desktops, to add-ons that both rely on monkey patching your desktop due to lack of addon api and can with a single crash kill your whole session, to hostility towards themeing, to ugly header bars, to hostility towards support for non gnome desktops. It is a worst in class solution.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
smoldesu 5y ago
> Gnome doesn't want thousands of developers implementing their own visions for their projects and others don't want to donate their time to implementing gnomes vision. This is definitely looking more-and-more like the case. The GNOME team's insistence on cutting people out of their workflow has left them with less contributors... which leaves them with a worse desktop and a roadmap that's being pushed further-and-further back. Every GNOME contributor you meet will try to deny it, but it really has come to a boiling point over the last few months. There have been so many feature cuts, unaddressed issues, internal hostility and asinine workarounds (text is broken on native apps, so ship with Flatpak until we get it fixed! wait, Flatpak has more issues?) that I really struggle to have any respect for their leadership now. They're throwing out pieces of the plane to get it off the runway, and the complete lack of communication combined with their internal holier-than-thou social ethics has turned a transparent, thriving community of users into a miasma of apologists, skeptics and people who have never tried anything else.
- awrmc 5y ago
  It's not easy for me to take this comment seriously because gnome doesn't actually have anything anyone could define as leadership. It's a decentralized open source thing. You might be incorrectly assuming bad faith.
  - michaelmrose 5y ago
    Every semi persistent grouping of individuals has leadership even if informal and redhat and the gnome foundation have defined leadership structures.
    - awrmc 5y ago
      But that's the whole thing. Redhat and the foundation don't have any leadership over a decentralized group of open source developers. Gnome is not like the Linux kernel where there's one giant repository with one lead maintainer serving as a bottleneck. There are individuals who hold more influence but that's more because a lot of other volunteers chose to follow them, not because they seized power from anybody.
  - smoldesu 5y ago
    GNOME has a foundation[0] that is responsible handling their funding as well as setting goals/standards for their desktop. As a matter of fact, they're the most well-funded desktop environment in the entire Linux desktop landscape. I think criticism is fair, especially when it pertains to removing features and working against the community using funding that is, in large part, raised by said community. [0] https://foundation.gnome.org/ https://foundation.gnome.org/
    - awrmc 5y ago
      That isn't how gnome works, being decentralized and all. The foundation pays for very little of the development and has little to no influence over what developers actually do. If you wanted the community to have more influence over development, the way to do that would actually be to get more money for the foundation so they can afford to hire more developers from the community. Right now, they don't employ any. The funding they have now is actually shockingly small for a nonprofit based in the USA, and almost unnoticeable compared to what a tech company based in the USA would have. Removal of features would still happen though because that's a natural part of any software project responding to the ever-shifting priorities of a large group of users.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
I understand. Tesla, Ford, and Toyota all have cars that work though. They all work so well you can basically swap any of them out and the user doesn't have to change anything. The user can pick any of those cars and do well. I'm not talking about cars though, I'm talking about Linux not getting a lot of traction on desktop because of too much choice. The mainstream environments are often not viable for somebody trying to switch. We can ignore it and create a dozen more distros and environments but this pollutes the Linux landscape even further.
- phendrenad2 5y ago
  You're right, a car is a bad analogy. Cars are several orders of magnitude more complex than a desktop environment. They probably even have more lines of code. A desktop environment isn't that difficult to make, that's why we have so many. Gnome and KDE peaked 10 years ago and they're now stuck in a local maxima, afraid to move outside their comfort zone. A new desktop environment is an opportunity to question assumptions and try to find a better design.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    There's no easy answer. The freedom of choice is beautiful and part of why I use Linux but an ecosystem can become polluted and drive away new users. I don't know what else to say. I'm describing the landscape as I see it. I do disagree that KDE or Gnome are stuck, I thought Gnome 40 was a nice refresh. It's evolved quite a bit from the Gnome 2 of Red Hat Linux that I used as a youngster.
  - noahadavis 5y ago
    If KDE and GNOME are stuck, it's not because they can't innovate with their UIs enough with traditional ways of interacting with a computer. In fact, I don't think innovating in a way that doesn't involve new ways to interact (such as VR/AR) is very desirable to most users. The truth is, most people don't want to install operating systems, even if they're free and easier to install than Windows. The only way to go further is to ship with hardware and for that combination of hardware and software to be in demand. On top of that, when the operating system/desktop environment has reached a decent baseline of general usability like KDE Plasma and GNOME have, the software ecosystem around the OS/DE is more of a limiting factor than the UIs of the OS/DE. The fact that System 76 sells laptops could actually give their DE a significant advantage over other small DEs if they ship their own DE. It's unlikely to overtake KDE and GNOME since System 76 doesn't sell tons of laptops like Dell or other big hardware companies, but I guess never say never. I don't expect instant world domination, but I hope the Steam Deck (which will ship KDE Plasma for its desktop mode) will greatly boost the popularity and developer community of KDE. With success, there is a chance at a snowball effect where new users who enjoy the product contribute and bring attention, which brings more new users, etc. All things considered, the share of people using the Steam Deck isn't going to be that big compared to Windows or even MacOS, but it is getting a lot of attention. One of my friends from the KDE community (which I am also a part of) has written multiple articles about this on his blog. Here's one: https://pointieststick.com/2021/12/09/what-desktop-linux-needs-to-succeed-in-the-mainstream/ https://pointieststick.com/2021/12/09/what-desktop-linux-nee... > A desktop environment isn't that difficult to make, that's why we have so many. We actually don't have that many and they actually are pretty difficult to make. Linux has quite a lot of window managers, but not complete desktop environments. The 2 most popular ones require a lot of maintenance. Even GNOME, which has gained a bit of a reputation for dropping features is very large in scope.
awrmc 5y ago
>Also gnome is so flawed in so many ways from leaking memory due to unfixable mismatch between js and compiled code, to nonsensical handling of multiple desktops, to add-ons that both rely on monkey patching your desktop due to lack of addon api and can with a single crash kill your whole session, to hostility towards themeing, to ugly header bars, to hostility towards support for non gnome desktops. Most of these issues are just bugs, not issues with some vision. The gnome people I've talked to want them fixed and want help with fixing them. But I get that it's lot easier to complain on hacker news than it is to fix architectural issues in a large codebase.
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  How they handle multiple monitors is a choice and the memory leaking is a design decision as is the lack of addon api and a system where any crashing addon takes out the whole session. Bugs are inevitable but bad design is not.
  - awrmc 5y ago
    The only one out of those that's a intentional design is multiple monitors. The other ones are known shortcomings that are just really hard to fix. The memory leak was fixed a few years ago: https://feaneron.com/2018/04/20/the-infamous-gnome-shell-memory-leak/ https://feaneron.com/2018/04/20/the-infamous-gnome-shell-mem...
    - michaelmrose 5y ago
      It is worth noting that the first release of Gnome 3 which had the leak from the outset was in 2011 and in 2018 they mostly "fixed" the problem by just constantly running the garbage collector and marveling at how not so horrible that is. Unfortunately the problem actually continued for some at least into 2020. In summary a broken design nearly completely ignored for 7 years and fixed with a band-aid that doesn't actually solve the underlying issue over the next 2 years. 11 years in and the design fail is still with us. I appreciate the fact that many of the contributors aren't paid for their efforts and I applaud their efforts to give to the community but large parts of gnome ought to regarded as learning experiences not something to build the rest of our software on top of. I hope System76's work will be a better basis especially since their financial success could fund future efforts.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

smoldesu 5y ago

> Gnome doesn't want thousands of developers implementing their own visions for their projects and others don't want to donate their time to implementing gnomes vision. This is definitely looking more-and-more like the case. The GNOME team's insistence on cutting people out of their workflow has left them with less contributors... which leaves them with a worse desktop and a roadmap that's being pushed further-and-further back. Every GNOME contributor you meet will try to deny it, but it really has come to a boiling point over the last few months. There have been so many feature cuts, unaddressed issues, internal hostility and asinine workarounds (text is broken on native apps, so ship with Flatpak until we get it fixed! wait, Flatpak has more issues?) that I really struggle to have any respect for their leadership now. They're throwing out pieces of the plane to get it off the runway, and the complete lack of communication combined with their internal holier-than-thou social ethics has turned a transparent, thriving community of users into a miasma of apologists, skeptics and people who have never tried anything else.

awrmc 5y ago
It's not easy for me to take this comment seriously because gnome doesn't actually have anything anyone could define as leadership. It's a decentralized open source thing. You might be incorrectly assuming bad faith.
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  Every semi persistent grouping of individuals has leadership even if informal and redhat and the gnome foundation have defined leadership structures.
  - awrmc 5y ago
    But that's the whole thing. Redhat and the foundation don't have any leadership over a decentralized group of open source developers. Gnome is not like the Linux kernel where there's one giant repository with one lead maintainer serving as a bottleneck. There are individuals who hold more influence but that's more because a lot of other volunteers chose to follow them, not because they seized power from anybody.
- smoldesu 5y ago
  GNOME has a foundation[0] that is responsible handling their funding as well as setting goals/standards for their desktop. As a matter of fact, they're the most well-funded desktop environment in the entire Linux desktop landscape. I think criticism is fair, especially when it pertains to removing features and working against the community using funding that is, in large part, raised by said community. [0] https://foundation.gnome.org/ https://foundation.gnome.org/
  - awrmc 5y ago
    That isn't how gnome works, being decentralized and all. The foundation pays for very little of the development and has little to no influence over what developers actually do. If you wanted the community to have more influence over development, the way to do that would actually be to get more money for the foundation so they can afford to hire more developers from the community. Right now, they don't employ any. The funding they have now is actually shockingly small for a nonprofit based in the USA, and almost unnoticeable compared to what a tech company based in the USA would have. Removal of features would still happen though because that's a natural part of any software project responding to the ever-shifting priorities of a large group of users.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

I understand. Tesla, Ford, and Toyota all have cars that work though. They all work so well you can basically swap any of them out and the user doesn't have to change anything. The user can pick any of those cars and do well. I'm not talking about cars though, I'm talking about Linux not getting a lot of traction on desktop because of too much choice. The mainstream environments are often not viable for somebody trying to switch. We can ignore it and create a dozen more distros and environments but this pollutes the Linux landscape even further.

phendrenad2 5y ago
You're right, a car is a bad analogy. Cars are several orders of magnitude more complex than a desktop environment. They probably even have more lines of code. A desktop environment isn't that difficult to make, that's why we have so many. Gnome and KDE peaked 10 years ago and they're now stuck in a local maxima, afraid to move outside their comfort zone. A new desktop environment is an opportunity to question assumptions and try to find a better design.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  There's no easy answer. The freedom of choice is beautiful and part of why I use Linux but an ecosystem can become polluted and drive away new users. I don't know what else to say. I'm describing the landscape as I see it. I do disagree that KDE or Gnome are stuck, I thought Gnome 40 was a nice refresh. It's evolved quite a bit from the Gnome 2 of Red Hat Linux that I used as a youngster.
- noahadavis 5y ago
  If KDE and GNOME are stuck, it's not because they can't innovate with their UIs enough with traditional ways of interacting with a computer. In fact, I don't think innovating in a way that doesn't involve new ways to interact (such as VR/AR) is very desirable to most users. The truth is, most people don't want to install operating systems, even if they're free and easier to install than Windows. The only way to go further is to ship with hardware and for that combination of hardware and software to be in demand. On top of that, when the operating system/desktop environment has reached a decent baseline of general usability like KDE Plasma and GNOME have, the software ecosystem around the OS/DE is more of a limiting factor than the UIs of the OS/DE. The fact that System 76 sells laptops could actually give their DE a significant advantage over other small DEs if they ship their own DE. It's unlikely to overtake KDE and GNOME since System 76 doesn't sell tons of laptops like Dell or other big hardware companies, but I guess never say never. I don't expect instant world domination, but I hope the Steam Deck (which will ship KDE Plasma for its desktop mode) will greatly boost the popularity and developer community of KDE. With success, there is a chance at a snowball effect where new users who enjoy the product contribute and bring attention, which brings more new users, etc. All things considered, the share of people using the Steam Deck isn't going to be that big compared to Windows or even MacOS, but it is getting a lot of attention. One of my friends from the KDE community (which I am also a part of) has written multiple articles about this on his blog. Here's one: https://pointieststick.com/2021/12/09/what-desktop-linux-needs-to-succeed-in-the-mainstream/ https://pointieststick.com/2021/12/09/what-desktop-linux-nee... > A desktop environment isn't that difficult to make, that's why we have so many. We actually don't have that many and they actually are pretty difficult to make. Linux has quite a lot of window managers, but not complete desktop environments. The 2 most popular ones require a lot of maintenance. Even GNOME, which has gained a bit of a reputation for dropping features is very large in scope.

awrmc 5y ago

>Also gnome is so flawed in so many ways from leaking memory due to unfixable mismatch between js and compiled code, to nonsensical handling of multiple desktops, to add-ons that both rely on monkey patching your desktop due to lack of addon api and can with a single crash kill your whole session, to hostility towards themeing, to ugly header bars, to hostility towards support for non gnome desktops. Most of these issues are just bugs, not issues with some vision. The gnome people I've talked to want them fixed and want help with fixing them. But I get that it's lot easier to complain on hacker news than it is to fix architectural issues in a large codebase.

michaelmrose 5y ago
How they handle multiple monitors is a choice and the memory leaking is a design decision as is the lack of addon api and a system where any crashing addon takes out the whole session. Bugs are inevitable but bad design is not.
- awrmc 5y ago
  The only one out of those that's a intentional design is multiple monitors. The other ones are known shortcomings that are just really hard to fix. The memory leak was fixed a few years ago: https://feaneron.com/2018/04/20/the-infamous-gnome-shell-memory-leak/ https://feaneron.com/2018/04/20/the-infamous-gnome-shell-mem...
  - michaelmrose 5y ago
    It is worth noting that the first release of Gnome 3 which had the leak from the outset was in 2011 and in 2018 they mostly "fixed" the problem by just constantly running the garbage collector and marveling at how not so horrible that is. Unfortunately the problem actually continued for some at least into 2020. In summary a broken design nearly completely ignored for 7 years and fixed with a band-aid that doesn't actually solve the underlying issue over the next 2 years. 11 years in and the design fail is still with us. I appreciate the fact that many of the contributors aren't paid for their efforts and I applaud their efforts to give to the community but large parts of gnome ought to regarded as learning experiences not something to build the rest of our software on top of. I hope System76's work will be a better basis especially since their financial success could fund future efforts.