6 ms·

If you don't like Gnome, and it doesn't cater to your requirements, there's plenty of other options that may. I don't really understand people who keep saying

by kimixa 4y ago

If you don't like Gnome, and it doesn't cater to your requirements, there's plenty of other options that may. I don't really understand people who keep saying they wish gnome was much more like KDE, for example - there's already KDE existing in that space for users. And it's not like Gnome are paying distros to ship it as default - they ship it because the maintainers think it's a sane default. Petitioning the distro maintainers would likely be a much more direct path if you disagreed with that and want to change it.

traverseda 4y ago
Firefox's file picker moving from a generic gtk file picker that blends into any DE reasonably well to one that's very eccentric and gnome specific does kind of piss me off. They did implement a way for people to use non-gnome file pickers with gtk programs (like firefox), but then they made it a lot more difficult to actually use that feature outside of flatpak...
- QUrprUd1nCeicw 4y ago
  It's not healthy to find yourself getting angry at decisions made by random open source projects. I really doubt anyone working on that has as strong opinions as you on what the file picker looks like, or they would have written one themselves by now. None of these projects owe anybody anything anyway, that's kind of the point of open sourcing things for free without any warranty.
  - traverseda 4y ago
    >None of these projects owe anybody anything anyway Do I owe them anything? Do I owe them silence, or to not complain, or to not tarnish their name? Clearly as human beings we both owe each-other something, there is a social contract at play here. I'm sure you've seen the infamous "you have to decide if you're a gnome app or an everybody else app", and clearly that developer thought other projects owed them something. But if you're just going to say "well gnome is immune from criticism because they're (paid) open source volunteers", well then what's the point of even talking to anyone? It's an amazing example of a thought-terminating cliche. Somehow when I'm bad mouthing gnome I owe the gnome project my silent support though. It is a mystery.
    - QUrprUd1nCeicw 4y ago
      There's a difference between honest criticism and low-effort rage bait. Helpful critique is about settling differences and finding a common ground to move forward. It's not about getting mad at others and holding a grudge. Do your best to avoid being that kind of angry internet person with a chip on the shoulder. You also don't owe anyone anything but just remember what goes around comes around. If you spend your time amplifying mistrust and resentment, instead of trying to build and repair trust and appreciation for one another, then you'll always be in a miserable place where you can't trust anybody. And let me make it clear. I don't care if you honestly criticize GNOME or any other project. I'm pointing out that this style of angry, substance-free criticism is less than useless, it's actually damaging to you and everyone around you because it's the classic short-sighted us-vs-them mentality. It purposely discards the truth in favor of always looking for an "enemy" to blame for everything. Open source isn't a zero-sum game, acting that way is counterproductive towards getting what you want. >I'm sure you've seen the infamous "you have to decide if you're a gnome app or an everybody else app", and clearly that developer thought other projects owed them something. No, that's a bad faith misinterpretation of the statement. GNOME, Ubuntu and XFCE all have different APIs that conflict with each other. Acknowledging this fact isn't a demand that anyone owes anyone anything, it's simply a fact. If developers want to use these APIs they have to pick which ones they're going to use.
      - traverseda 4y ago
        >I'm pointing out that this style of angry, substance-free criticism is less than useless There is a lot of substance in the various criticisms by people in this comment thread, now some of it is heated at this point and there's a lot of frustration involved, but there is a lot of legitimate criticism. If you don't believe me believe the SDL dev, or the LXQT devs (formally LXDE, but they had a falling out with gnome), or the many many other devs that do have legitimate criticism. There's a lot of legitimate criticism, it just keeps being dismissed as "well gnome can do whatever it wants". It can, but if it does then it should expect to lose social capital and good will. No one owes the Gnome project any good will, and it's rapidly burning through it's remaining supply. The good news is that it's a comparatively well connected and well funded open source project, so probably it doesn't need that much good will. on the topic of "finding a common ground to move forward", well that's almost exactly the advice I'd give the Gnome project in regards to rebuilding some of that social capital and good will. But I really do think the ball is in their court at this point, and the claims that they are un-interested in cooperation, or in any supporting the broader open source community, well I'd say that's fair. Most open source software has a certain amount of good will towards other open source software, SDL is a backbone of open source and if they ask you to please reconsider well then... you reconsider. They've helped the broader open source community out a lot so you help them out. But with gnome it's very clear that we're not all in this together. Gnome is one team, and the broader open source community is another team. They won't help us out, so why should we help them out. Even the basic appearance of compromise would help this out tremendously, something like "well this doesn't really help Gnome but we'll do it anyway" for a few relevant features. Make it a GSoC project or something. No one owes anybody anything but there is a social contract, and while gnome doesn't have to abide by it they do get to suffer the consequences of violating it. Mostly right now those consequences are people bitching on the internet and mostly not writing new stuff in GTK unless they're part of the gnome community.
midoridensha 4y ago
>And it's not like Gnome are paying distros to ship it as default - they ship it because the maintainers think it's a sane default. That's not true. Gnome is actively supported by some of the distros, Red Hat in particular.
- kaba0 4y ago
  You have the “arrows” reversed.
  - midoridensha 4y ago
    I figured that was obvious and I didn't need to detail the relationship. Obviously, Gnome isn't paying anyone; they're funded and paid (through dev salaries) by RH and friends, who exercise a lot of control over the project's direction. Of course the distro maintainers are going to ship Gnome, because it's theirs.

by kimixa 4y ago

traverseda 4y ago

Firefox's file picker moving from a generic gtk file picker that blends into any DE reasonably well to one that's very eccentric and gnome specific does kind of piss me off. They did implement a way for people to use non-gnome file pickers with gtk programs (like firefox), but then they made it a lot more difficult to actually use that feature outside of flatpak...

QUrprUd1nCeicw 4y ago
It's not healthy to find yourself getting angry at decisions made by random open source projects. I really doubt anyone working on that has as strong opinions as you on what the file picker looks like, or they would have written one themselves by now. None of these projects owe anybody anything anyway, that's kind of the point of open sourcing things for free without any warranty.
- traverseda 4y ago
  >None of these projects owe anybody anything anyway Do I owe them anything? Do I owe them silence, or to not complain, or to not tarnish their name? Clearly as human beings we both owe each-other something, there is a social contract at play here. I'm sure you've seen the infamous "you have to decide if you're a gnome app or an everybody else app", and clearly that developer thought other projects owed them something. But if you're just going to say "well gnome is immune from criticism because they're (paid) open source volunteers", well then what's the point of even talking to anyone? It's an amazing example of a thought-terminating cliche. Somehow when I'm bad mouthing gnome I owe the gnome project my silent support though. It is a mystery.
  - QUrprUd1nCeicw 4y ago
    There's a difference between honest criticism and low-effort rage bait. Helpful critique is about settling differences and finding a common ground to move forward. It's not about getting mad at others and holding a grudge. Do your best to avoid being that kind of angry internet person with a chip on the shoulder. You also don't owe anyone anything but just remember what goes around comes around. If you spend your time amplifying mistrust and resentment, instead of trying to build and repair trust and appreciation for one another, then you'll always be in a miserable place where you can't trust anybody. And let me make it clear. I don't care if you honestly criticize GNOME or any other project. I'm pointing out that this style of angry, substance-free criticism is less than useless, it's actually damaging to you and everyone around you because it's the classic short-sighted us-vs-them mentality. It purposely discards the truth in favor of always looking for an "enemy" to blame for everything. Open source isn't a zero-sum game, acting that way is counterproductive towards getting what you want. >I'm sure you've seen the infamous "you have to decide if you're a gnome app or an everybody else app", and clearly that developer thought other projects owed them something. No, that's a bad faith misinterpretation of the statement. GNOME, Ubuntu and XFCE all have different APIs that conflict with each other. Acknowledging this fact isn't a demand that anyone owes anyone anything, it's simply a fact. If developers want to use these APIs they have to pick which ones they're going to use.
    - traverseda 4y ago
      >I'm pointing out that this style of angry, substance-free criticism is less than useless There is a lot of substance in the various criticisms by people in this comment thread, now some of it is heated at this point and there's a lot of frustration involved, but there is a lot of legitimate criticism. If you don't believe me believe the SDL dev, or the LXQT devs (formally LXDE, but they had a falling out with gnome), or the many many other devs that do have legitimate criticism. There's a lot of legitimate criticism, it just keeps being dismissed as "well gnome can do whatever it wants". It can, but if it does then it should expect to lose social capital and good will. No one owes the Gnome project any good will, and it's rapidly burning through it's remaining supply. The good news is that it's a comparatively well connected and well funded open source project, so probably it doesn't need that much good will. on the topic of "finding a common ground to move forward", well that's almost exactly the advice I'd give the Gnome project in regards to rebuilding some of that social capital and good will. But I really do think the ball is in their court at this point, and the claims that they are un-interested in cooperation, or in any supporting the broader open source community, well I'd say that's fair. Most open source software has a certain amount of good will towards other open source software, SDL is a backbone of open source and if they ask you to please reconsider well then... you reconsider. They've helped the broader open source community out a lot so you help them out. But with gnome it's very clear that we're not all in this together. Gnome is one team, and the broader open source community is another team. They won't help us out, so why should we help them out. Even the basic appearance of compromise would help this out tremendously, something like "well this doesn't really help Gnome but we'll do it anyway" for a few relevant features. Make it a GSoC project or something. No one owes anybody anything but there is a social contract, and while gnome doesn't have to abide by it they do get to suffer the consequences of violating it. Mostly right now those consequences are people bitching on the internet and mostly not writing new stuff in GTK unless they're part of the gnome community.

midoridensha 4y ago

>And it's not like Gnome are paying distros to ship it as default - they ship it because the maintainers think it's a sane default. That's not true. Gnome is actively supported by some of the distros, Red Hat in particular.

kaba0 4y ago
You have the “arrows” reversed.
- midoridensha 4y ago
  I figured that was obvious and I didn't need to detail the relationship. Obviously, Gnome isn't paying anyone; they're funded and paid (through dev salaries) by RH and friends, who exercise a lot of control over the project's direction. Of course the distro maintainers are going to ship Gnome, because it's theirs.