Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 10th Mar 2011 12:59 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y If you were, you know, living your lives, you've probably missed it, but old fires are burning brightly once again: there's somewhat of a falling-out going on between KDE and GNOME, with Canonical siding squarely with... KDE. The issue seems to revolve around GNOME's lack of collaboration, as explained by KDE's Aaron Seigo.
Thread beginning with comment 465607
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Gnome is not wrong.
by axilmar on Thu 10th Mar 2011 13:19 UTC
axilmar
Member since:
2006-03-20

You can't blame Gnome for 'not co-operating'. They don't want to co-operate, it's their right to not co-operate.

Although my opinion is that there even shouldn't be two or more different desktop environments for Linux, I don't think Gnome devs can be blamed for the path they have chosen.

That's the price of freedom. We may not agree with the others, but we've got to respect their position.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Gnome is not wrong.
by Kasi on Thu 10th Mar 2011 13:28 in reply to "Gnome is not wrong."
Kasi Member since:
2008-07-12

Its not so much everyone is saying Gnome is wrong.

This is meant to focus attention what is going on and to understand why things are happening the way they are. Its the equivalent of asking someone why they don't want to be your friend anymore.

If Gnome flat out said we just don't want to collaborate anymore - then yeah its their prerogative and everyone would just have to accept that but that doesn't mean people can't ask why they decided that.

Reply Parent Score: 10

RE: Gnome is not wrong.
by John Blink on Thu 10th Mar 2011 22:03 in reply to "Gnome is not wrong."
John Blink Member since:
2005-10-11

I don't think Gnome devs can be blamed for the path they have chosen.

That's the price of freedom. We may not agree with the others, but we've got to respect their position.


True they can choose a path. In the past they chose cooperation and that was a good decision.

I am so glad things like fonts, copy and paste, and other things that I am not in the know about, just work today.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE: Gnome is not wrong.
by m_abs on Fri 11th Mar 2011 06:54 in reply to "Gnome is not wrong."
m_abs Member since:
2005-07-06

You can't blame Gnome for 'not co-operating'. They don't want to co-operate, it's their right to not co-operate.

Yes, it's their right to choose the path they want.
That does however not mean that they can't or shouldn't be critiqued for their choice.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: Gnome is not wrong.
by Morgan on Fri 11th Mar 2011 12:19 in reply to "Gnome is not wrong."
Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

Although my opinion is that there even shouldn't be two or more different desktop environments for Linux, I don't think Gnome devs can be blamed for the path they have chosen.



I for one am very happy to have a wide range of DE/WM choices in GNU/Linux, and by extension in BSD-based OSes. If it were just Gnome or just KDE or just the two of them, projects such as Tiny Core Linux, CrunchBang, Puppy, DSL, GParted LiveCD and countless system recovery and other quite useful distros wouldn't exist. GNU/Linux doesn't just exist to serve the needs of the very few desktop OS-oriented users. It exists for everyone and as such, there are a myriad of ways to get information from the system to the screen.

Canonical can choose KDE or Gnome or whatever it wants to, meanwhile all of the above distros plus some (GNUStep, Zenwalk, Wolvix...) will remain in my CD wallet for whatever I need them for on a particular day.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Gnome is not wrong.
by segedunum on Fri 11th Mar 2011 22:56 in reply to "Gnome is not wrong."
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

It certainly is Gnome's prerogative not to use what the developers don't want to use, but what has been really distasteful over the years is when Gnome has come up with it's own solutions to things, shoved them on Free Desktop and portrayed them as FD 'standards' (when in reality they serve their own agenda) with no consultation or work with anyone else. Mostly they just ouright pass the work of others as their own. The Tango icon spec many moons ago was a good example. It was actually a KDE contributed spec that was dressed by by other people as something different.

Gnome simply starts from a default position of "If you're compatible with us and use our libraries then you're cross desktop friendly", and that's the way things are constantly portrayed.

I've certainly been pointing out this for years but it all gets portrayed as trolling and those around Gnome have all tried to weasel out of it by portraying it all as a 'misunderstanding' and that it's somehow all everyone's fault. I suppose it's taken this long for it all to come to a head.

There is something deeply endemic and rotten in the Gnome project because the faces have steadily changed over the years but the attitudes have remained oddly familiar. It's an attitude of being deeply protectionist, close minded and scared of anything that might be better than what they've come up with. However, the disturbing thing is that they routinely try and weasel out of that by telling people they have misunderstood, things haven't been discussed when they have as Jon McCann did and just plain sticking to a story that isn't true.

Gnome is a project with an endemic mental disease, put simply.

Mark Shuttleworth will probably be wishing he had just gone with KDE all those years ago and had a positive effect and relationship there. It might be too late for him and his company now.

Edited 2011-03-11 22:57 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 11