User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

A cash crunch at the GNOME Foundation

A cash crunch at the GNOME Foundation

Posted Apr 15, 2014 12:29 UTC (Tue) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950)
In reply to: A cash crunch at the GNOME Foundation by Wol
Parent article: A cash crunch at the GNOME Foundation

I've had the same discussion with bronson for multiple years it seems. I've said we're lacking in various ways. But it is never good enough. Always there is some proof that

In this thread for instance:
Person A: You're doing X wrong
me: yeah, we need to improve

This is hijacked to prove I'm not listening. I obviously know that over the network GNOME 3 will be slow. I've said that to bronson multiple times already.

When I acknowledge one pain point for one person, turning this into proof that I don't listen, not aware of other points, etc... During those years I've made various things happen that bronson highlighted. Things that have been in release notes. Alan Day also has held various rounds of "fix small annoyances" (I forgot what he called them).

I have listened and changed things. I never noticed any ack for that. Just that it still not good enough, etc. Only getting complaint after complaint: I'm not a PR/communication person. I try to gather feedback, but there have been multiple years of history here. Don't base your opinion of me on just how I act in one article.

For the network bit: I cannot do shit about it. I don't use it. Probably utterly terrible and don't think most developers look at it. Maybe Wayland eventually fixes it? No clue.

I can handle "this really sucks", but turning a "this is not good enough" statement from mine into proof that I'm terrible for X'th amount of time in multiple years: I not going to take that nicely.

(Log in to post comments)

A cash crunch at the GNOME Foundation

Posted Apr 16, 2014 23:43 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

Strange to see myself portrayed as such a perfectionist! Cinnamon is a fine example of good enough. It's a long, long way from perfect, but it at least it tries to appeal to both existing and new users and avoid breaking the world. Also, it got decent multiple monitor support working first.

As for listening... I said basically, "Gnome 3 caused me a lot of wasted time and lost billable hours. It didn't have to be that way." To which you (and maybe others) said basically, "yes, it did, 3 and 2 in parallel was impossible, and it's not that big a deal anyway since Gnome 2.0 did the same thing." We reiterated ourselves a few times, nobody could understand the other's point of view, so that's that. Maybe I'm not listening either.

Still, I'm saddened that you still only see one pain point for one person. When Gnome 4 comes around, I suppose it's going to be another throw-your-users-in-the-shredder release. I just don't understand how a mature project can think that this is at all acceptable. Or why distros would accept such capricious instability in their default desktops.

Oh well.

(for the record, I was the one complaining about multiple monitors and netbooks. I don't think I've complained about Gnome 3's network speed, except maybe in quoting someone else.)

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds