3 ms·
An example of a group of users who find this feature valuable is [new] users who might want to have documentation open in a browser while navigating the command
by TheCowboy 13y ago
An example of a group of users who find this feature valuable is [new] users who might want to have documentation open in a browser while navigating the commandline. I've definitely found it useful, especially when on a small laptop screen.
The response that it's open source, don't complain, you fix it, doesn't even seem to apply here. Does it even make sense to commit a patch to put a feature back in that a maintainer with power over the direction of the project decided to remove without explanation?
Additionally, open source is also about community and wanting people to use your software, not alienate users out of some misguided ideal that sounds good in your head but just makes you out to be a selfish jerk in practice.
- adrianlmm 13y agoThen the terminal would need to be really transparent allow text reading, honestly, I find that improbable. The fix it argument is valid in any open source project that you don't contribute, and if you want to contribute show first valid arguments. Open source is about many goals, a simple terminal transparency is not one of them, and why would a user alienated because it doesn't have a transparent terminal?