The Grumpy Editor's GNOME 3 experience

> > > if we didn't try something new, the whole thing is going to be dead in a couple years.
> > You have to be kidding me.
> You've got to be trolling me?

The implication was that gnome 2.x was done, and it certainly was not.

> > * fix using alt+tab while dragging (most of my windows are full screen, so dragging between apps means switching foreground windows at the same time)
> That's an interesting bug, should probably be fixed, yes. If you don't have a bug number already, tell me and I'll file it.

https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=135056

> > * fix all of the dialogs that are too tall to fit in smaller screens (think netbooks, or systems set to 640x480 for accessibility reasons or have larger fonts set. )
> 640x isn't even a usable resolution any more, most definitely not for "accessibility" reasons. However, 1024x600 resolutions are quite common on netbooks.

I'll let you tell that one to some of the co-workers I have had in the past. Good luck.

> > * fix the problems that happen when various parts of the the desktop crash or are kill -9ed. (why do my icons move around in the panel even when they are locked?)
> Already fixed. But why are you expecting things to shut down cleanly when you do not shut it down, cleanly?
If I add an item in a list, I do not expect that doing so will randomize the list if I don't close the program down safely.

> > * merge metacity and compiz
> Why? Merging two active and distinctly separated codebases with different development policies is not a pretty option, just look at the mess it causes in kvm/qemu and similar developments. This is just you wanting others to do gruntjob for no good reason, so you can sit around and feel superior that you were such a good idea person.

Because even though I have an ATI video card with good, working open source drivers, I end up switching back to metacity from compiz whenever I need to get work done. Compiz just doesn't have many of the usability enhancements that have been in metacity for a long time.

> > * Gnome 3 should have been a branch and the 2.x mainline development should not have stopped until gnome 3 was ready to be merged.
> It was a branch, and it was merged when it was decided to be ready, then work continued on it.

Gnome 2.x was 90% of the way there, now it is abandoned and any fixes will only be seen in enterprise distro patches (if any).