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 465678
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Copyright Assignment
by jamboarder on Thu 10th Mar 2011 21:35 UTC in reply to "Copyright Assignment"
jamboarder
Member since:
2009-02-16

Not quite right. libappindicator is a library that is one implementation (Canonical/Unity) of the proposed spec. Apps that use the library would no more be required to assign copyright that any other library.

More importantly GNOME didn't need to accept libappindicator to implement the spec. They could have rejected libappindicator on copyright assignment or whatever grounds - as they have - and still implemented the spec on their own in GNOME shell. They didn't. They implemented their own app/systray mechanism in GNOME Shell while effectively ignoring the fact that on fd.o it was known that folks were trying to implement a cross-desktop systray/notification spec. Now apps built to use the GNOME Shell systray/notification area may not work with KDE's Plasma systray/notification area. And guess which party will probably adjust in the name of practicality? KDE. This is not the only instance of this kind of behavior and I can understand why KDE folks tire of it. I'm sure the KDE community and Canonical has areas for improvement as well. But, to Aaron's ultimate point, we can't keep pretending everything's peaches and sunshine when there is real damage occurring. As a FOSS community, we can do better than this...

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Copyright Assignment
by somebody on Fri 11th Mar 2011 01:33 in reply to "RE: Copyright Assignment"
somebody Member since:
2005-07-07

so... basically... they are doomed because they didn't accept the spec implementation based on licensing they couldn't agree with? or are they doomed because they didn't put work into creating spec implementation which they don't need?

ffs, isn't FOSS exactly about having choice? in your words, they haven't got one. wtf is wrong with the fact you deny developer right to his choice?

if you haven't noticed, g-s was delayed few times now, meaning they have no time to work on spare work they don't really need in order to put g-s out. some features even got cut out for 3.2. and still you demand work not needed to be done. hey, i also have some lawn that needs mowing. so, any gnome developer reading this, after you finish that spec implementation, contact me for further instructions

Reply Parent Score: -1

RE[3]: Copyright Assignment
by smitty on Fri 11th Mar 2011 03:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Copyright Assignment"
smitty Member since:
2005-10-13

so... basically... they are doomed because they didn't accept the spec implementation based on licensing they couldn't agree with? or are they doomed because they didn't put work into creating spec implementation which they don't need?

ffs, isn't FOSS exactly about having choice? in your words, they haven't got one. wtf is wrong with the fact you deny developer right to his choice?

if you haven't noticed, g-s was delayed few times now, meaning they have no time to work on spare work they don't really need in order to put g-s out. some features even got cut out for 3.2. and still you demand work not needed to be done. hey, i also have some lawn that needs mowing. so, any gnome developer reading this, after you finish that spec implementation, contact me for further instructions


This has nothing to do with accepting someone else's code or not liking the license. It's about working with a cross-desktop spec. They would have been free to implement it however they wanted.

And yes, every project should be free to ignore whatever specs they don't like. The point is not that ignoring the appindicators is terrible, but that Gnome is doing the same thing to practically everything that is proposed on fd.o. Essentially, the whole point behind fd.o is dead, because one side is ignoring it. Appindicators is just 1 hot topic that demonstrates this - the rule rather than the exception.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[3]: Copyright Assignment
by jamboarder on Fri 11th Mar 2011 06:02 in reply to "RE[2]: Copyright Assignment"
jamboarder Member since:
2009-02-16

so... basically... they are doomed because they didn't accept the spec implementation based on licensing they couldn't agree with? or are they doomed because they didn't put work into creating spec implementation which they don't need?

ffs, isn't FOSS exactly about having choice? in your words, they haven't got one. wtf is wrong with the fact you deny developer right to his choice?


Oh please, that's meaningless strawman argumentation. No one's trying to deny any developer choice. The issue is quite simply the communication of those choices to others in the community who were demonstrably interested in improving the systray/notification area without break cross-desktop compatibility and while still allowing as much flexibility as possible. And no, no one can force them to communicate or implement anything they do not want to. But folks can certainly point out the accumulating consequences of this lack of communication and of the choices made.

The consequences are not just academic. In this specific case, there are real, practical consequences to app developers in the entire FOSS ecosystem. Many apps already designed to work with the spec won't work properly with GNOME shell's systray/notfication area. Apps designed to work with GNOME's systray/notification area won't work properly with other DEs systray/notification area. So sure, they can choose to do whatever they want and everyone else can just choose to suck it up and adjust once again to those choices in the name of practicality. However, I can hardly blame some folks for finally saying that they're a little tired of it.

Feel free to carry on huffing and puffing about your lawn though...

Reply Parent Score: 3