Re: Clueless users are bad for debian (was Let's CENSOR it!)
On Sun, 28 Mar 1999, Joseph Carter wrote:
> I was talking about the whole pile of lib bugs that have kept GNOME 1.0
> out of even unstable.
The bugs are in gnome-core, not gnome-libs. I don't know of any major
recent bugs in the libraries. The staging area is not because of bugs,
it's because multiple packages have to be coordinated. (Number of bugs
isn't a criterion for inclusion in unstable anyway...)
> > GUI software is *hard* to write well, and 90% of the tens of thousands of
> > lines of Gnome-related code is less than a year old. Don't rant until
> > you've tried coding something this big and complex. You simply have no
> > idea.
> but a lot of the problems with GNOME are lack of
> planning and real forethought.
I agree, but that's exactly the point. It is a huge project, and the goals
are very ambitious. It is actually a couple orders of magnitude harder to
program than KDE (an ORB implementation (and using CORBA at all), Gtk
changing underneath and maintained by the same community, esound, window
manager independence, the Gtk object system, C rather than C++). ORBit,
Gtk, and the various window managers are all separate projects with their
own goals. It is like cat herding times fifty.
Basically, if you count all the sub-components Gnome is a project almost
as large as Debian in terms of number of developers. It is far larger in
terms of lines of code being written. But it has none of the
organizational infrastructure. Do you begin to see the problem?
I appreciate your 20/20 hindsight but...
> As for "don't whine", if GNOME is in the "don't whine" stage they had no
> business releasing 1.0 IMNSHO...
I said the *applications* (i.e. things like gnome-apt and Gnumeric) were
in the don't whine category, and they are not 1.0, you will notice.
It's quite fair to whine about the 1.0 gnome-session and gmc, they were
fucked up. But mostly fixed now I think.