Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Nov 2012 16:32 UTC
Gnome Not even GNOME itself could ignore the GNOME 3 criticism for much longer. "As part of the planning for the DropOrFixFallbackMode feature, we've decided that we will compile a list of supported gnome-shell extensions. This will be a small list, focused on just bringing back some central 'classic' UX elements: classic alt tab, task bar, min/max buttons, main menu. To ensure that these extensions keep working, we will release them as a tarball, just like any other module."
Thread beginning with comment 543533
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: they just dont get it
by bouhko on Thu 29th Nov 2012 10:39 UTC in reply to "RE: they just dont get it"
Member since:

Can you elaborate on the Arch thing ? I've only used it a bit, but it seems to have a very good reputation.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: they just dont get it
by Morgan on Thu 29th Nov 2012 11:07 in reply to "RE[2]: they just dont get it"
Morgan Member since:

It's a long story, but to sum up: Over the past several months the core dev team has made some radical and abrupt changes to the distro, including changing to systemd (which I personally had no problem with apart from the mishandling of the switch itself) to doing away with the excellent installer in favor of a cryptic script based install. There were some less jarring changes but those two were critical to the controversy.

Whenever they were questioned about the changes, most of the Powers That Be responded at best with "f--k off, noob" even if the user herself was old hat. More than one core member made statements to the effect of "it's our intention to drive away anyone who doesn't follow the Arch Way without question" or "Noobs need not apply; if you can't figure out how the new (lack of an) installer works, you don't deserve to run Arch". A few people (myself included, though I was never personally involved in the fight) decided to drop the distro and either take up another pacman based OS or go to another distro family altogether.

All that said, it's still an excellent OS and one of the best for learning the "guts" of GNU/Linux. I just personally can't stand the rampant elitism and childish behavior of the leaders, which is mirrored in the Gnome dev camp.

Edit: If you're curious about alternatives, I've found Manjaro Linux to be an excellent replacement for Arch. It's built on the Arch platform and uses pacman, but has its own repositories. You can still build from the AUR if Manjaro lacks a package you need, and of course you can compile from source as well.

Edited 2012-11-29 11:10 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: they just dont get it
by Alexander on Thu 29th Nov 2012 15:19 in reply to "RE[3]: they just dont get it"
Alexander Member since:

I actually liked the new installer more than the old one. I'm not particularly experienced arch user, but i had no problem with it.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: they just dont get it
by Gusar on Thu 29th Nov 2012 11:31 in reply to "RE[2]: they just dont get it"
Gusar Member since:

Morgan is exaggerating severely. I've not seen the traffic on the Arch forums drop. Sure this is anecdotal, but the way I see it, Arch's userbase hasn't diminished. Yeah, a few who don't like systemd or the new install method did leave, but not nearly enough to say the devs "pissed everyone off". For every vocal systemd opponent, there was at least one person saying they just switched to it and all is cool.

Those "quotes" about what Arch devs supposedly said are overblown too, the Arch devs are not actively trying to drive people away. What is true is that the goal of Arch was never popularity, it was never a user-centric distro. So if a user doesn't like something and leaves for a different distro, that doesn't matter to the devs. There were quite a few people (including Morgan it seems) for whom this is news. But it's always been like that. It just seems that the devs never before did something a vocal group of users would disagree with.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: they just dont get it
by Morgan on Thu 29th Nov 2012 20:21 in reply to "RE[3]: they just dont get it"
Morgan Member since:

How did I exaggerate? I said a few people left, I never said anything about hordes of migration. I also quoted what I read; I didn't read every thread about it but what I quoted was in several threads in some form as well as on Google+.

My personal opinion was that it became a childish game at that point, and rather than get involved on either side I decided to drop the distro. It's really no big deal, and I still think it's a great OS (which is why when I did switch it was to an Arch based distro).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: they just dont get it
by drcouzelis on Thu 29th Nov 2012 15:03 in reply to "RE[2]: they just dont get it"
drcouzelis Member since:

Instead of relying on the opinion from someone who was unhappy with the decision, you can read the original thread here:

I'll try really hard to be unbiased: For a long time, Arch Linux was initialized by using the /etc/rc.conf file. The developers changed the default init system to systemd. Some people (I don't know how many) didn't like the change and complained about it on the forums. Some people (I don't know how many) liked the change. At the same time, the Arch Linux developers changed the installation procedure from an ncurses helper application to a more command-line process.

Both the Arch Linux developers and the unhappy users have good reasons (in my opinion) for their actions and opinions.

...there. Hopefully you can't even tell how I feel about the situation. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: they just dont get it
by Morgan on Thu 29th Nov 2012 20:25 in reply to "RE[3]: they just dont get it"
Morgan Member since:

As I said above, there was more than one thread on it by far. There was also heated chatter on Google+ about it.

Once again, my problem was with the childishness of it all rather than the changes themselves. I like the switch to systemd and the new installer was a non-issue for me. My problem was purely with the negative attitudes of those involved.

Reply Parent Score: 2