Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Aug 2012 21:04 UTC, submitted by suka
Thread beginning with comment 531572
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: They should not explain themselves to me
by _txf_ on Tue 21st Aug 2012 07:48
in reply to "They should not explain themselves to me"
I think some people took the 3.x stable versions too seriously just as they did with KDE 4 when it was launched. Gnome 2.x was perfectly fine. KDE 3 was fine when version 4.0 was released.
The thing with kde4 was that initially it was serverly lackin, however as time passed each release became saner and saner (at the same time as making improvements).
With Gnome 3 each successive design decision seems more removed from the practicalities of a desktop environment.
RE: They should not explain themselves to me
by ephracis on Tue 21st Aug 2012 11:48
in reply to "They should not explain themselves to me"
I really do not feel like any project I do not contribute time or money to should explain anything to me. If some guys have some good/bad/crazy idea and commit resources to see it done then it's fine by me.
As a developer of a FOSS project I try to always explain why I focus on certain bugs, or skip some feature suggestions, or what vision I have for the near future.
Users may not contribute time or money but I sure do love them a whole lot. They make it so much more fun to continue with the project and their feedback (good or bad) always make me smile. It shows me that someone out there is taking an interest in what I do and what I create.
I sure don't need to explain myself to my users, but the they are my most valuable asset. I sure want them to know that I always listen to their input.
:)




Member since:
2009-12-05
I really do not feel like any project I do not contribute time or money to should explain anything to me. If some guys have some good/bad/crazy idea and commit resources to see it done then it's fine by me.

That being said, I have a sense that some of those devs live in their own little worlds. I still have no idea if that is good or bad.
It will be interesting to see what RedHat will do with Gnome 3 on workstations. Two or three iterations from now, Gnome might be a very different beast if they have to target those environments.
I think some people took the 3.x stable versions too seriously just as they did with KDE 4 when it was launched. Gnome 2.x was perfectly fine. KDE 3 was fine when version 4.0 was released. I used my Ubuntu 10.04 install (+ppa for some more recent software pieces) until Canonical actually managed to make Unity stay out of my way (and not crash and burn every time I looked at it) in 12.04. RHEL releases come with the old Gnome 2 code base too.
People that expect something rock-solid, tested, super stable every 6 months are smoking pretty good stuff. To them I say "pass the dutchie"