Re: A call to drop gnome
On Tuesday 16 April 2019 09:54:19 Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 09:35:32AM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > > > R> The usual arguments apply. Don't like it - patch it. Patches
> > > > are R> welcome.
> >
> > I wondered how long it would take for that phrase to emerge, so
> > everyone in a position of control can hide behind it yet again.
> >
> > > > Say, "can you translate Odissey from ancient greek to Rovigo
> > > > dialect?"
> > >
> > > Nope. But I can pay to someone who does, assuming that I want such
> > > translation. Same as everyone else.
> > >
> > > > That is a petty example (if you can, my kudos!), patching is not
> > > > a thing this easy to do. You have to be a programmer good
> > > > enought, then you have to understando how the program works and
> > > > how to change it. Then you have to write the changes and
> > > > possibly test it against existing test cases, it requires
> > > > skills, it requires time.
> > >
> > > ... and there are those who did it already. But then again, for me
> > > GNOME project went off-rails (usability POV, not a technical one)
> > > long time ago. Patching the GNOME to restore sane behaviour is
> > > harder than avoiding it.
> >
> > +1000!
>
> Um, Gene. You are aware that I wrote both arguments, are you?
I thought it was a bit odd, but so many are using broken quoting, so I
shrugged it off.
>
> > > > Gnome goal is noble, to let unskilled users use it.
> > >
> > > I recall hearing similar rhetoric 25 years ago. Some Operating
> > > System who's name starts with big W, and it had 4-color flag for
> > > logo. Some say that rise in popularity of said OS involved an
> > > unspecified amount of unconventional off-market negotiations and a
> > > bag of dirty tricks.
> >
> > We all heard the same "sermon" and ran like hell because we already
> > were familiar with both their market controlling efforts and this
> > same bag of dirty tricks a bar of good soap has little effect
> > because you simply cannot make them palatable in a free market.
> >
> > I see Linus is drifting back to his older style, issuing the desktop
> > people a whipping they are in need of over the weekend, saying 90%
> > of why linux doesn't control the desktop is that there is not a
> > standardized, one size fits all because it can do all things
> > desktop.
>
> A link please, LKML will suffice. If Linus is back after that CoC
> story in all his former glory - I need to see this.
>
> Reco
I got unsubbed from lkml a couple years back for "interference". Seems
like I read it on /. 2, maybe 3 days back. I don't think I'd call it
former glory, but some leakage and frustration are quite evident. He was
IMO. overdoing the nice guy bit just a bit. He needs to add a bit more
iron to his control. I see the lack of that over the last year as being
partially responsible for this present bruhaha. Or maybe thats just me?
Your call. :)
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
Reply to: