4 ms·

so, i read through some of that, the complaints about api changes and the developer responses. i did not read the entire thing however, from what i read, i agr

so, i read through some of that, the complaints about api changes and the developer responses. i did not read the entire thing however, from what i read, i agree with the developers. they want a certain thing, so they are making it. they don't want people changing their ui/ux. if you don't like that, don't use it. use something else. or, fork it. make it what you want it to be

vacri 14y ago
You may have missed this gem: Getting in deeper, not only are GNOME devs content to break their own desktop, but they want features removed from apps simply because GNOME no longer supports them!
- micaeked 14y ago
  umm... just to make sure i understand. they want to change their software. they are telling others who rely on their software supporting something that they are getting rid of that. i see nothing wrong with that. they can do whatever they want with their software. don't like it? fork it, start your own, etc. or am i misunderstanding?
  - vacri 14y ago
    Find the relevant part in the article, it will become clear. Don't forget either that Gnome 3 isn't meant to be 'software just for the devs', it's meant to be a popular, heavyweight desktop that's attractive to a lot of users - so much so that it's meant to be [one of] the "default" linux desktops. Articles like this just show the train crash that is the development process in pursuit of those goals.
    - micaeked 14y ago
      i'm seeing lots of emotions for some reason. don't like a wm? use something else. is a developer from another project harassing you? say "no. go away. shoo". this is just silly
      - Avshalom 14y ago
        "use something else" doesn't help if one of the two[1] primary linux toolkits is constantly breaking things in order to bend applications into their branding. That kind of shit bleeds out. [1]Actually it's worse than one of the two because QT has been so tightly coupled for so long (and I seem to recall some licensing stuff earlier on) GTK is really closer to the primary toolkit for non desktop specific apps.
      - vacri 14y ago
        You're really missing the point. For example, this story about the developer isn't about harrassment, it's about the complete misunderstanding of other projects and how they work.
        micaeked 14y ago
        umm... my point is, you're free to ignore someone, tell them to go away, not use their software, etc. you can do whatever you want with your project (within reasonable limits, obviously. i would normally not add a qualifier, but you seem like a picky fellow). and they can do whatever they want (same qualifier)
        Gravityloss 14y ago
        This is a very problematic approach for developers who are looking to commit to a library for years. In the least, it leads to extremely inefficient resource usage as you have to constantly rewrite everything, or just abandon your app. So, if we go back in history, what could developers do when choosing their libraries? They would need some kind of assurance that it's not going to change a lot. Perhaps a foundation with rules that require voting and a large majority to change guiding principles and rules. We need predictability in software development, like we do need in other industries and avenues of life. It is very very valuable in real tangible terms.
        chris_wot 14y ago
        You know, if I wanted to add toggle button back to the dialogue box, do I really need to fork the Gnome project just to get it back? Seriously?
  - reefab 14y ago
    No, they are telling software developers making "third-party" software to remove features from their software because gnome developers don't use them.
  - werid 14y ago
    in this case, they wanted a feature removed from a 3rd party program, because gnome did no longer support this feature. meanwhile, the program still runs on non-gnome desktops, which do support the feature... which leads to this quote: "I guess you have to decide if you are a GNOME app, an Ubuntu app, or an XFCE app"
  - guard-of-terra 14y ago
    GTK is a huge thing used by hundreds of unrelated projects, some of whose very big. It is a responsibility. Gnome developers basically plundered the development of GTK and now only care about their use cases. They should admit that they are irresponsible. It is bad.
    - krakensden 14y ago
      In defense of GTK, there is really only one person working on it, plus the occasional patch submission.
      - guard-of-terra 14y ago
        Maybe they should focus on maintenance then instead of runaway development featuring breaking backwards compatibility and existing use cases? I understand you can't have both stability and new features with limited resources, but they should choose stability.
- mercurial 14y ago
  This one is pretty good too: I guess you have to decide if you are a GNOME app, an Ubuntu app, or an XFCE app unfortunately. I’m sorry that this is the case but it wasn’t GNOME’s fault that Ubuntu has started this fork. And I have no idea what XFCE is or does sorry. The GNOME devs quoted in TFA seem to labour under the misapprehension that GNOME is not part of a wider ecosystem, but that GNOME is the ecosystem instead.

vacri 14y ago

You may have missed this gem: Getting in deeper, not only are GNOME devs content to break their own desktop, but they want features removed from apps simply because GNOME no longer supports them!

micaeked 14y ago
umm... just to make sure i understand. they want to change their software. they are telling others who rely on their software supporting something that they are getting rid of that. i see nothing wrong with that. they can do whatever they want with their software. don't like it? fork it, start your own, etc. or am i misunderstanding?
- vacri 14y ago
  Find the relevant part in the article, it will become clear. Don't forget either that Gnome 3 isn't meant to be 'software just for the devs', it's meant to be a popular, heavyweight desktop that's attractive to a lot of users - so much so that it's meant to be [one of] the "default" linux desktops. Articles like this just show the train crash that is the development process in pursuit of those goals.
  - micaeked 14y ago
    i'm seeing lots of emotions for some reason. don't like a wm? use something else. is a developer from another project harassing you? say "no. go away. shoo". this is just silly
    - Avshalom 14y ago
      "use something else" doesn't help if one of the two[1] primary linux toolkits is constantly breaking things in order to bend applications into their branding. That kind of shit bleeds out. [1]Actually it's worse than one of the two because QT has been so tightly coupled for so long (and I seem to recall some licensing stuff earlier on) GTK is really closer to the primary toolkit for non desktop specific apps.
    - vacri 14y ago
      You're really missing the point. For example, this story about the developer isn't about harrassment, it's about the complete misunderstanding of other projects and how they work.
      - micaeked 14y ago
        umm... my point is, you're free to ignore someone, tell them to go away, not use their software, etc. you can do whatever you want with your project (within reasonable limits, obviously. i would normally not add a qualifier, but you seem like a picky fellow). and they can do whatever they want (same qualifier)
        Gravityloss 14y ago
        This is a very problematic approach for developers who are looking to commit to a library for years. In the least, it leads to extremely inefficient resource usage as you have to constantly rewrite everything, or just abandon your app. So, if we go back in history, what could developers do when choosing their libraries? They would need some kind of assurance that it's not going to change a lot. Perhaps a foundation with rules that require voting and a large majority to change guiding principles and rules. We need predictability in software development, like we do need in other industries and avenues of life. It is very very valuable in real tangible terms.
        chris_wot 14y ago
        You know, if I wanted to add toggle button back to the dialogue box, do I really need to fork the Gnome project just to get it back? Seriously?
- reefab 14y ago
  No, they are telling software developers making "third-party" software to remove features from their software because gnome developers don't use them.
- werid 14y ago
  in this case, they wanted a feature removed from a 3rd party program, because gnome did no longer support this feature. meanwhile, the program still runs on non-gnome desktops, which do support the feature... which leads to this quote: "I guess you have to decide if you are a GNOME app, an Ubuntu app, or an XFCE app"
- guard-of-terra 14y ago
  GTK is a huge thing used by hundreds of unrelated projects, some of whose very big. It is a responsibility. Gnome developers basically plundered the development of GTK and now only care about their use cases. They should admit that they are irresponsible. It is bad.
  - krakensden 14y ago
    In defense of GTK, there is really only one person working on it, plus the occasional patch submission.
    - guard-of-terra 14y ago
      Maybe they should focus on maintenance then instead of runaway development featuring breaking backwards compatibility and existing use cases? I understand you can't have both stability and new features with limited resources, but they should choose stability.
mercurial 14y ago
This one is pretty good too: I guess you have to decide if you are a GNOME app, an Ubuntu app, or an XFCE app unfortunately. I’m sorry that this is the case but it wasn’t GNOME’s fault that Ubuntu has started this fork. And I have no idea what XFCE is or does sorry. The GNOME devs quoted in TFA seem to labour under the misapprehension that GNOME is not part of a wider ecosystem, but that GNOME is the ecosystem instead.