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 465806
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Why no GNOME Perspective?
by segedunum on Fri 11th Mar 2011 23:17 UTC 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

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

They're in those links, including Dave Neary's blog posting.

I'm afraid you're not going to be able to get around this by claiming that Gnome's 'position' hasn't been represented and also claiming that everyone else is having a tantrum.

None of this is hearsay either. Read. Don't post meaningless crap. READ.

Reply Parent Score: 2