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 531814
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[10]: Plan?
by satsujinka on Wed 22nd Aug 2012 18:49 UTC in reply to "RE[9]: Plan?"
satsujinka
Member since:
2010-03-11

I never argued that it is. Simple is usually not complex. Nautilus is complex. I showed that and gave an example of additional features that make it so (menus, dialogs, and scripting.) None of those features are necessary to the goal at hand (an easy to use file browser.) It is dishonest to call nautilus simple. This is mostly true of everything that gnome does (gedit for instance is ~55kloc, and most of its features exist in the form of the gtksourceview widget.)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[11]: Plan?
by Hiev on Wed 22nd Aug 2012 19:06 in reply to "RE[10]: Plan?"
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

Simple of use is what I'm talking about, simplicity of code can be arguable, becuase nautilus needs to access network shares, dected mime tipes, show previews, etc.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[12]: Plan?
by satsujinka on Wed 22nd Aug 2012 21:38 in reply to "RE[11]: Plan?"
satsujinka Member since:
2010-03-11

Nautilus is certainly easy to use as a file browser, but so is thunar, pcmanfm, or dolphin/konquerer. There's no reason to use nautilus if we're just using basic functionality (which as I said fits into something a magnitude of order smaller.)

So if we aren't using nautilus because it's simple, then why would you remove features in the name of simplicity?

If gnome wants a small + simple file browser then they should start over. This prevents users noticing loss of features (since they can continue using nautilus) and it ensures that the structure of the new browser is simple (and thus easily maintained.)

Reply Parent Score: 3