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 466179
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Duck and Cover
by dneary on Tue 15th Mar 2011 10:37 UTC in reply to "Duck and Cover"
dneary
Member since:
2011-03-15

I really don't know what else could have been done to get StatusNotifier into Gnome.


If you want to get GNOME to adopt an interface, then talk about what the interface is intended to achieve. Don't ignore the history in the discussions either. Look up Galago, for example, as some background context, and libnotify.

This little gem in Dave Neary's blog tells you all you need to know about how they really feel about collaboration:

"This is not a compelling problem statement. No user ever had a problem because notifications didn’t use D-Bus.

I don't know what you can say to that. D-Bus was initiated many years ago, by a prominent Gnome developer no less, to ensure that apps and desktops could communicate with each and work, thus helping those very same users. KDE embraced and uses D-Bus extensively.
"

Are you willfully and deliberately inferring something I didn't say, or is it accidental?

Look at what I said: no user ever had a problem because notifications didn't use DBus. Allow me to rephrase: No user cares what under-the-covers technology is used to fix the issues he has, or implement features he's interested in.

User problems are of the type: "I want to know when my computer connects to a wifi network" or "I want to know when I have an appointment coming up without opening a calendar application" or "I want to know when I have new email without opening my email client". And I don't care whether that's implemented in the back-end with DBus messages, shared memory, small applets that use inotify to watch mbox files, or whatever. It doesn't matter to me, the user what the desktop environment & application developer do to solve my problem.

Dave.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Duck and Cover
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 15th Mar 2011 10:47 in reply to "RE: Duck and Cover"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

User problems are of the type: "I want to know when my computer connects to a wifi network" or "I want to know when I have an appointment coming up without opening a calendar application" or "I want to know when I have new email without opening my email client". And I don't care whether that's implemented in the back-end with DBus messages, shared memory, small applets that use inotify to watch mbox files, or whatever. It doesn't matter to me, the user what the desktop environment & application developer do to solve my problem.


Not directly, but it does matter indirectly, and that's what you're ignoring. Because of GNOME's my-way-or-the-highway approach to this particular issue, developers now have to go out of their way to support multiple APIs for something as elementary and basic as as this, meaning additional work, additional code, and thus, additional room for bugs. This WILL matter to users, even if they don't know about it or can't put it into words.

Worse yet - it may mean some developers will choose to ignore one implementation, which will also adversely affect users. They may think "screw this" and stick to Xembed, which will also adversely affect users. Especially now that the most popular desktop distribution is going all-out with Unity, you might see developers giving the virtual finger to GNOME, which will - again - adversely affect your users.

This is an element that I've been missing from GNOME's side of the story, and it's the element that actually matters. KDE gets this - interoperability benefits users, even if that means that KDE developers must swallow their pride and use something that could be a bit sub-par or didn't originate from within KDE.

As a user, it looks like to me that GNOME simply can't stand Ubuntu going with Unity - and that's fine. You have the right to be unhappy with this. However, fighting this out in a way that hurts users is bad - and antithetical to the values of Free/open source software. This is behaviour I come to expect from Apple and Microsoft - not from the Free software community.

Edited 2011-03-15 10:51 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[3]: Duck and Cover
by allanregistos on Thu 17th Mar 2011 08:43 in reply to "RE[2]: Duck and Cover"
allanregistos Member since:
2011-02-10

[q]
As a user, it looks like to me that GNOME simply can't stand Ubuntu going with Unity - and that's fine. You have the right to be unhappy with this. However, fighting this out in a way that hurts users is bad - and antithetical to the values of Free/open source software. This is behaviour I come to expect from Apple and Microsoft - not from the Free software community.


I agree. During my reading of all the related blogs (except for the witch hunt), my conclusion is not favourable to the GNOME camp. It is sad because I always prefer GNOME over any desktop.

On the positive side, it is helpful for the reason that it awakens me and informed me as a user for this whole collaboration issue and its impact to me as a user. If every DE in the FOSS world collaborated with each other in the past, I may be getting an awesome and innovative desktop today, and it may help me as an application developer to develop application faster using the innovative development tools available as a result.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Duck and Cover
by Morty on Tue 15th Mar 2011 21:08 in reply to "RE: Duck and Cover"
Morty Member since:
2005-07-06

Don't ignore the history in the discussions either. Look up Galago, for example, as some background context, and libnotify.

He, he, don't ignore history indeed. Nice of you to bring up that particular fuck up, as it's another nice example showing off Gnomes cross desktop "collaboration" and illustrate the projects persistent NIH issues. It underline aseigos argument quite nicely, and show it's not a new problem.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: Duck and Cover
by Soulbender on Wed 16th Mar 2011 06:34 in reply to "RE[2]: Duck and Cover"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Ys, what DID happen to Galago? I remember that from years back but then it just...disappeared.

Reply Parent Score: 2