3 ms·
If people pay for real open-source work, for example, KDE and GNOME, rather than some dotfiles, that's better.
by usamoi 1mo ago
If people pay for real open-source work, for example, KDE and GNOME, rather than some dotfiles, that's better.
- GardenLetter27 1mo agoThis money is funding Hyprland and QuickShell.
- aquariusDue 1mo agoSo a fancy window manager and a desktop environment (toolkit) in its infancy?
- 1GZ0 1mo agoYes, because when you build a product on top of something, you support your dependencies. Crazy idea, I know.
- dewey 1mo agoThe foundation is not even one week old, and the first project just got selected as they were already closely working with the Omarchy project on some things. What makes you come to the conclusion that "more important" dependencies wouldn't receive funding in the future?
- valsann 1mo agoBoth are cool projects, but their scope is totally different to that of GNOME or KDE.
- GardenLetter27 1mo agoLimited scope isn't a bad thing. But both have done great work too - I use gnome-keying and KDE Connect all the time.
- roto 1mo agoMany people are/were already paid for gnome dev work, less so for KDE, but there is a bit. RedHat & friends has funded loads of it over the years since it was picked as the defacto enterprise desktop. It hasn't really managed to have a big impact on penetrating the desktop market because they have not tried to push a real non-enterprise desktop linux variant in multiple decades at this point. I don't think giving them a little bit more money will have any noticeable impact on this whatsoever. Calling work on these newer projects not "real" work is frankly just disrespectful, even if you don't personally use them. And they are not paying for dotfiles, they are paying the core devs of the software...