Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 20th Aug 2012 21:04 UTC, submitted by suka
Gnome In a recent interview with the Austrian newssite derStandard.at, GNOME designer Jon McCann talks about GNOME OS, the consequences of Canonical leaving GNOME behind, the purported removal of features and the future role of Linux distributions. "I think there was a time when GNOME had kind of a crisis, we didn't know where we wanted to go, we were lacking goals and vision - that was the end of the GNOME2 cycle. So we pulled together and formed a vision where we want to go - and actually did something about it. And now we have been marching on that plan for quite some time."
Thread beginning with comment 531750
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Not so fluffy at all
by _txf_ on Wed 22nd Aug 2012 09:29 UTC in reply to "RE: Not so fluffy at all"
_txf_
Member since:
2008-03-17

That is the answer from one guy to the removal of the extra pane, not the whole community.


AFAICT the answer from the community is that they want the extra pane.

If the developers stated grievances (ignoring requests for comments, non-communication). Then pattern of behaviour leads to what others call "the abyss".

If somebody contributes a feature but requests comments on how to change,fix or improve said feature to fix the problems stated as the reasons for removal, then that isn't going to inspire others to "waste" time developing for gnome.

There are numerous other examples where people provide reasoned (and correct) examples why the alteration/removal of a feature is a bad idea, they simply get ignored or shouted down as being unproductive.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Not so fluffy at all
by Hiev on Wed 22nd Aug 2012 19:03 in reply to "RE[2]: Not so fluffy at all"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

They can fork the code and mantained them self, what is the problem?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Not so fluffy at all
by mat69 on Wed 22nd Aug 2012 19:24 in reply to "RE[3]: Not so fluffy at all"
mat69 Member since:
2006-03-29

The problem is the way of communicating things.
In the link I posted it is mentioned that it took quite a while with a lot of discussions, reviews etc. before the feature was taken in.
And I think this is a sensible way for introducing new stuff.

And now it is taken out without even discussing the issue with its author and even worse ignoring the author's and the other's questions, remarks etc.

"We hate it" is for sure the best attitute to improve something...

Reply Parent Score: 4