| |||||||||||||
Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power usersMena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power usersPosted Nov 10, 2012 18:09 UTC (Sat) by Zizzle (guest, #67739)In reply to: Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users by zander76 Parent article: Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users
Well I think your tone and language is below that of LWN.
Sure I was being dramatic for effect, just like the parent article, and maybe over did it and invited such a response.
But my point was, if I like GNOME 2 and am able to keep using it without it being forked and everything being renamed, then surely that is good for the GNOME brand and the GNOME project.
My impression is the GNOME project has lost a lot of developers since 3.0
I'm not asking for anyone to maintain anything or do any work other than not having the latest immediately obsolete the old working code. Is that unreasonable?
Any additional work caused by this would surely be worth the effect of keeping the users who GNOME 3 isn't ready for yet (if it ever gets to that point).
The MATE project should not have been necessary. It should be under the GNOME project. But the GNOME devs decided they wanted to poison that well.
(Log in to post comments)
Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users Posted Nov 10, 2012 20:44 UTC (Sat) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link]
Gnome devs made a big mistake by not making Gnome 3 and Gnome 2 installable in parallel. If they took that approach then the change it would of gone over a lot smoother for users. A big thing that gets repeated is the feeling of loss of control over the desktop and allowing people to switch back and forth easily would of avoided that perception.
Major problems with that approach is that, however, Gnome devs were not willing to spend their time supporting two different desktops. Even if they were willing to support it trying to maintain two systems would have a deteriorous effect on both. Advanced users would not of taken kindly to bug reports being closed with the equivalent of "Switch to Gnome 3, get somebody else to fix it, or fork it yourself".
Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users Posted Nov 11, 2012 18:11 UTC (Sun) by vonbrand (subscriber, #4458) [Link] Don't continue with Gnome 2 is a mistake only if they have plenty of developer bandwidth dedicated to continue Gnome 2 with Gnome 3. As things stand, they have barely enough to move one environment forward. And no, "just keep Gnome 2 forever" would have meant losing the little they have, so that was never an option. Just look at the communities trying to keep Gnome 2 going...
Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users Posted Nov 14, 2012 18:07 UTC (Wed) by jedidiah (guest, #20319) [Link]
All they had to do was not break it.
They could have made it clear that it was an orphan never to be touched again. I have used applications like that for YEARS after the developer abandoned it. That's the nice thing about software. It doesn't wear out. I can still use some crufty old Athena app 20 years later.
The fact that MATE is a bother is not a terribly convincing argument that the GNOME devs did the right thing.
Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users Posted Nov 10, 2012 23:36 UTC (Sat) by zander76 (guest, #6889) [Link]
You are absolutely right. That was way below the standards of LWN. I apologies for the tone and language. I would like to see this whole conversation leave LWN for that very reason.
optional discussion Posted Nov 11, 2012 19:49 UTC (Sun) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link]
We do get that you would like to see the discussion go away. Violence to the even tone of LWN discussion was obviously not the reason. Avoiding the discussion is much easier than avoiding Gnome 3 usability regressions, for reasons discussed.
Mena-Quintero: A Friday rant on Gnome 3, journalists, and power users Posted Nov 11, 2012 0:47 UTC (Sun) by misc (subscriber, #73730) [Link]
Well, it is up to the distribution to manage to have gnome 2 and 3 to be installable at the same time. Experience with kde3 showed this was a nightmare.
For the rest, tarballs are still there, git is still there. Since you ask to no one to do any work, that's exactly what they did.
|
|||||||||||||