Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th Mar 2011 18:59 UTC
Talk, Rumors, X Versus Y And over the weekend, the saga regarding Canonical, GNOME, and KDE has continued. Lots of comments all over the web, some heated, some well-argued, some wholly indifferent. Most interestingly, Jeff Waugh and Dave Neary have elaborated on GNOME's position after the initial blog posts by Shuttleworth and Seigo, providing a more coherent look at GNOME's side of the story.
Thread beginning with comment 466068
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: in one comment
by robmv on Mon 14th Mar 2011 19:52 UTC in reply to "RE: in one comment"
robmv
Member since:
2006-08-12

yes witch hunt is bad but what could GNOME developers do if the effort in course was done privately?, become Canonical employees to have access to those discussions?, or wait until the code dump is thrown in their faces, accept it!!!. If GNOME developers decided to implement something resembling what Canonical was doing in closed doors, I do not blame them

Edited 2011-03-14 19:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: in one comment
by acobar on Mon 14th Mar 2011 20:07 in reply to "RE[2]: in one comment"
acobar Member since:
2005-11-15

They still knew that the KDE guys where looking for a common solution.

I don't want to repeat all was said from the different sides. If there are more than one human inside a room, it is quite obvious that unpleasantness will show up.

Fact is, FOSS desktops are by far in small quantities on a world full of hostile competitors. If the FOSS community wants to be relevant on desktop, they need to sort out the differences and cooperate.

Reply Parent Score: 12

RE[3]: in one comment
by _txf_ on Mon 14th Mar 2011 20:10 in reply to "RE[2]: in one comment"
_txf_ Member since:
2008-03-17

yes witch hunt is bad but what could GNOME developers do if the effort in course was done privately?


The spec was open and people on the kde side did make sure it was known. Gnome did not have to accept canonicals work, but could have implemented their own version following the spec if they had problems with canonicals implementation. The thing here is that the new gnome systray was developed later and some people had full knowledge that there were working implementations by kde and canonical.

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE[3]: in one comment
by allanregistos on Thu 17th Mar 2011 03:25 in reply to "RE[2]: in one comment"
allanregistos Member since:
2011-02-10

yes witch hunt is bad but what could GNOME developers do if the effort in course was done privately?, become Canonical employees to have access to those discussions?, or wait until the code dump is thrown in their faces, accept it!!!. If GNOME developers decided to implement something resembling what Canonical was doing in closed doors, I do not blame them

robmv, that is one of the *reasons* GNOME won't accept any wrong doing for *NOT* collaborating, but certainly not a *valid* reason at all for not working together, regardless if those were *DONE* in private, the effort of collaboration should be high given to promote the use of Linux on the desktop, and thus collaborating between DEs is a must to make it easy for application developers! Note: ISVs(gaming, productivity suites,etc) are the most critical component of the Linux desktop, and that compromise should *have* been made. Look, just run KDE apps on the GNOME, it's not native looking, that is an example of not collaborating, very far away from the *private* argument.

Reply Parent Score: 1