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 465617
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Why no GNOME Perspective?
by Mystilleef on Thu 10th Mar 2011 14:05 UTC
Mystilleef
Member since:
2005-06-29

You gave KDE and Canonical's perspective, but you didn't give any GNOME perspective.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Why no GNOME Perspective?
by _txf_ on Thu 10th Mar 2011 14:36 in reply to "Why no GNOME Perspective?"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

Unfortunately, in this case their perspective is wrong. They were initially open to the idea, made requests to change some things in the spec, many of which were done in order to accommodate gnome. Some things were not changed but were justified technically by kde, whereupon the gnome devs stopped replying...

Then later said no we don't want this, it does not fit with our vision. It could have been made to fit but they chose to ignore it.

Reply Parent Score: 10

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

Unfortunately, in this case their perspective is wrong. They were initially open to the idea, made requests to change some things in the spec, many of which were done in order to accommodate gnome. Some things were not changed but were justified technically by kde, whereupon the gnome devs stopped replying...


So say Canonical and KDE. The point is, we don't have any GNOME perspective linked here. Quoting back Shuttleworth and Saigo doesn't equate to having the GNOME side of the story, and the one thing we must always keep in mind in these situations is that no story is ever one-sided.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

That's all anecdotal. Where is the evidence? Where are mails on the mailing list? What GNOME developers explicitly or implicitly rejected the proposals? And why? Hearsay doesn't count.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Why no GNOME Perspective?
by Thom_Holwerda on Thu 10th Mar 2011 15:37 in reply to "Why no GNOME Perspective?"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

You gave KDE and Canonical's perspective, but you didn't give any GNOME perspective.


Uh? Are you sure you read this piece?

Reply Parent Score: 6

Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

Yeah, I did. I don't see any insights from GNOME developers.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Why no GNOME Perspective?
by VistaUser on Thu 10th Mar 2011 19:49 in reply to "Why no GNOME Perspective?"
VistaUser Member since:
2008-03-08

A gnome developers perspective:

http://nathaniel.themccallums.org/2011/03/10/i-hate-to-say-i-told-y...

(Not the project's perspective, but that of an individual.)

Reply Parent Score: 4

somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

lol, you just made another side to the point.

as a spectator after reading everything i can only say this

damn... i wish these people were hot babes fighting in the mud located few feet away from me while i am lying on the couch and drinking beer.

one wants to be steve jobs of FOSS and actually believes he knows the road to heaven. ones have one and the only truth. and one is just ranting to put more oil on the fire between the first two.

boohoo, cry me a river. make competing desktops where everyone supports as many distros as possible and let users decide which one is the best. then... if you lose, admit and support the winner by contributing to his project instead of yours

on personal note... seeing unity, i was disappointed. last thing i want is broken design. and even more so osx like menu. i also hate osx like pinned dialogs in g-s, but they are easy to disable. currently, on my desktop, g-s is winning, while kde never had even the slightest chance

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Why no GNOME Perspective?
by molnarcs on Thu 10th Mar 2011 19:57 in reply to "Why no GNOME Perspective?"
molnarcs Member since:
2005-09-10

You gave KDE and Canonical's perspective, but you didn't give any GNOME perspective.

Well, you might want to read the comments. Jeff Waughn came in guns blazing and called Mark a liar without any specifics but a promise to dig up some dirt more later to prove his point. Then he went on to drive the discussion on Aaron's blog offtopic by blathering about timelines, posts from 3 years ago as well as insisting on discussing who said what at a conference in 2008. Finally, he managed to degenerate the discussion into a flamewar. If Jeff's antics are any indication of the way GNOME will deal with the issue, I think we may have to give up any hope of getting them working with the larger FLOSS community (and freedesktop.org).

Reply Parent Score: 9

Delgarde Member since:
2008-08-19

Well, you might want to read the comments. Jeff Waughn came in guns blazing and called Mark a liar without any specifics but a promise to dig up some dirt more later to prove his point. Then he went on to drive the discussion on Aaron's blog offtopic by blathering about timelines, posts from 3 years ago as well as insisting on discussing who said what at a conference in 2008. Finally, he managed to degenerate the discussion into a flamewar. If Jeff's antics are any indication of the way GNOME will deal with the issue, I think we may have to give up any hope of getting them working with the larger FLOSS community (and freedesktop.org).


I'd not blame Jeff exclusively on that - by my reading, half the participants (including both Jeff and Mark) were behaving like squabbling kids in the kindergarten playground. None of them setting a particularly good example of leadership...

Reply Parent Score: 2

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Well, you might want to read the comments. Jeff Waughn came in guns blazing and called Mark a liar without any specifics but a promise to dig up some dirt more later to prove his point.

Yes I saw that. It was a little funny if nothing else. Where the hell did that cancerous influence come from? He hasn't done anything in, well ever, and he bulldozes his way in trying to talk for Gnome, but then sticking in disclaimers to tell people that he doesn't actually speak for Canonical or Gnome.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Why no GNOME Perspective?
by segedunum on Fri 11th Mar 2011 23:17 in reply to "Why no GNOME Perspective?"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

You gave KDE and Canonical's perspective, but you didn't give any GNOME perspective.

We all know what the Gnome perspective is, because we've experienced it over the last decade.

They will weasel out of directly answering anything, portray it all as a misunderstanding and that it is all somehow everyone's fault. They will tell us that certain things haven't been discussed when they have. Jon McCann as well as others have done this already. Notice it's everyone elses' word against his and nothing can be proved or disproved? They then keep things going round in this cycle and no one gets anything out of them until the whole thing kind of goes away.

Nothing will then be solved and things will not move forwards. We'll then waste another decade.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

All I want to see are the correspondences in the mailing lists, forums and bug reports. Hearsay, anecdotal accounts, conflated events and emotional tantrums are irrelevant.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Why no GNOME Perspective?
by drcouzelis on Sat 12th Mar 2011 15:02 in reply to "Why no GNOME Perspective?"
drcouzelis Member since:
2010-01-11

http://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2011/03/11/lessons-learned/

I think this could be considered "GNOME's perspective", although from reading it a bit, I get the feeling that there is no "GNOME group" to give their perspective.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Mystilleef Member since:
2005-06-29

Yeap, I posted it above too. That's a very well written entry.

Reply Parent Score: 2