5 ms·

Please see my above comment for why it is wildly incorrect to describe the removal of features as "user-hostile": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32205125

Please see my above comment for why it is wildly incorrect to describe the removal of features as "user-hostile": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32205125 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32205125 In general, going to developers with a list of demands for patches to revert is not going to be helpful, it is much more likely that behavior is seen as hostile, coming from a user. It would be more useful to ask them why they have removed those features, figure out what their goal is, and then discuss it so you can reach consensus. >because the devs are hostile to APIs that would allow such functionality This one is blatantly incorrect, see this twitter thread from a GNOME developer: https://twitter.com/tobias_bernard/status/1457438553810558987 https://twitter.com/tobias_bernard/status/145743855381055898...

pizza234 4y ago
> It would be more useful to ask them why they have removed those features, figure out what their goal is, and then discuss it so you can reach consensus. That's not a productive approach; it would make the GNOME devs slaves of popularity contests. These are not my words. They're the words of a GNOME member¹ > as a question was there any kind of community review No, maintainers are not meant to become slaves of popularity contests. Discussions with GNOME devs seems not to lead anywhere. Here³'s the opionion of a Pop!_OS maintainer: Something @GNOME NEEDS to realize is that Pop!_OS, Ubuntu, and others are NOT going to stop theming. What we will do instead is replace GNOME components entirely if it becomes too costly to apply our style to them. Come up with a way forward for custom styles, or lose users. The theming problem has been very much discussed - if with "discussing", you mean lots of users (devs) talking to a wall. It's worse actually; the GNOME team actively prevented devs from developing theming, and advocated against it. I actually had a link where a GNOME dev was urging Debian (or Ubuntu, can't remember) to revert a patch that restored terminal transparency (or something like that). Could you help me finding it? Here's an interesting reply from Christian Persch²: > 1. Open gnome terminal > 2. Go to Edit -> Profile Preferences > Actual result: Background configuration tab is missing. > It was present in 3.6 version, please return it back. No. The above was actually discussed on HN⁴. Regarding this: This one is blatantly incorrect, see this twitter thread from a GNOME developer: https://twitter.com/tobias_bernard/status/145743855381055898... The "*lot* of work" has never been discussed with users (I've checked the multiple requests in the bug trackers). Given the amount of egomania in GNOME's background, and lack of strong (actually, any) technical grounds in the twit, the twit has exactly zero validity. ¹: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695371#c35 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695371#c35 ²: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698544 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698544 ⁴: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5690689 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5690689 ³: https://web.archive.org/web/20210901171117/https://twitter.com/jeremy_soller/status/1433088460655452162 https://web.archive.org/web/20210901171117/https://twitter.c...
seba_dos1 4y ago
The Twitter thread you linked to is irrelevant - it's talking about completely different thing than what GP mentioned.
- pizza234 4y ago
  Apologies, this has been an incorrect definition on my side (but correctly understood by the GP). What I referred to with "tiling capabilities" in: > tiling capabilities of the terminal are severely limited because the devs are hostile to APIs that would allow such functionality (see Tilix debate) is actually the keyboard navigation/selection support in the terminal. There has been debate between the terminal maintaner(s) and the GNOME VTE maintainer, and lead to nothing. Without providing any technical information, the twit means nothing, and IMO, in the context of the GNOME devs culture, it's just another, typical, "F* you". The is a reference to the debate [in the Tilix bug tracker](https://github.com/gnunn1/tilix/issues/1305 https://github.com/gnunn1/tilix/issues/1305), but regarding the debate itself, I don't have it handy.

pizza234 4y ago

> It would be more useful to ask them why they have removed those features, figure out what their goal is, and then discuss it so you can reach consensus. That's not a productive approach; it would make the GNOME devs slaves of popularity contests. These are not my words. They're the words of a GNOME member¹ > as a question was there any kind of community review No, maintainers are not meant to become slaves of popularity contests. Discussions with GNOME devs seems not to lead anywhere. Here³'s the opionion of a Pop!_OS maintainer: Something @GNOME NEEDS to realize is that Pop!_OS, Ubuntu, and others are NOT going to stop theming. What we will do instead is replace GNOME components entirely if it becomes too costly to apply our style to them. Come up with a way forward for custom styles, or lose users. The theming problem has been very much discussed - if with "discussing", you mean lots of users (devs) talking to a wall. It's worse actually; the GNOME team actively prevented devs from developing theming, and advocated against it. I actually had a link where a GNOME dev was urging Debian (or Ubuntu, can't remember) to revert a patch that restored terminal transparency (or something like that). Could you help me finding it? Here's an interesting reply from Christian Persch²: > 1. Open gnome terminal > 2. Go to Edit -> Profile Preferences > Actual result: Background configuration tab is missing. > It was present in 3.6 version, please return it back. No. The above was actually discussed on HN⁴. Regarding this: This one is blatantly incorrect, see this twitter thread from a GNOME developer: https://twitter.com/tobias_bernard/status/145743855381055898... The "*lot* of work" has never been discussed with users (I've checked the multiple requests in the bug trackers). Given the amount of egomania in GNOME's background, and lack of strong (actually, any) technical grounds in the twit, the twit has exactly zero validity. ¹: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695371#c35 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695371#c35 ²: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698544 https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698544 ⁴: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5690689 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5690689 ³: https://web.archive.org/web/20210901171117/https://twitter.com/jeremy_soller/status/1433088460655452162 https://web.archive.org/web/20210901171117/https://twitter.c...

seba_dos1 4y ago

The Twitter thread you linked to is irrelevant - it's talking about completely different thing than what GP mentioned.

pizza234 4y ago
Apologies, this has been an incorrect definition on my side (but correctly understood by the GP). What I referred to with "tiling capabilities" in: > tiling capabilities of the terminal are severely limited because the devs are hostile to APIs that would allow such functionality (see Tilix debate) is actually the keyboard navigation/selection support in the terminal. There has been debate between the terminal maintaner(s) and the GNOME VTE maintainer, and lead to nothing. Without providing any technical information, the twit means nothing, and IMO, in the context of the GNOME devs culture, it's just another, typical, "F* you". The is a reference to the debate [in the Tilix bug tracker](https://github.com/gnunn1/tilix/issues/1305 https://github.com/gnunn1/tilix/issues/1305), but regarding the debate itself, I don't have it handy.