Slashdot Mirror
Release Team Proposes Gnome 3.0 Plans
benuski writes "Today at GUADEC, the Gnome User and Developer European Conference, the gtk+ team announced their plans for gtk+ 3.0; immediately after, the Gnome release team announced their plans for Gnome 2.30 to be changed into Gnome 3.0. This would mean a release date a year and a half to a year in the future. Details are short at the moment, but the Gnome team seems to be following in KDE's footsteps, but hopefully will avoid the problems that plagued KDE 4.0's release."
Worthless without pics ;)
Is there any anticipated changelist for 3 yet?
I see your $0.02 and raise you a nickel.
My problem with KDE 4 is that I can't drag a box over several desktop to select multiple desktop icons. That drives me nuts!
My problem with Gnome is the fact that I can't adjust the screen saver properties without some ugly hack.
I know, these are minor issues, but annoying nonetheless. And your post was probably the nickel's worth anyway.
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
Community software should mean that people can easily post bug reports and get issues like these addressed.
Open a bug for each issue and hopefully they will be addressed.
I think it is beneficial to the entire community when people report these things.
The problem is that these don't appear to be bugs, but design choices. I believe that the gnome developers intentionally removed the option to configure each of the different screen savers and that the KDE dev's set up their horrid desktop icon system by design.
What's to file?
There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
I think he's implying that Gnome has no features.
Which, while not entirely true, is not entirely unfair.
GNOME HCI guidelines are one of the best I know of. Following the HCI leads to surprisingly good physical and mental health. 1) Navigating the GNOME dialog box with just the keyboard provides a rejuvenating and rigorous finger and mental exercise at the same time. 2) The font choices make pupil dilation effortless 3) The occlusion of "OK/Cancel" in elongated dialog boxes make accepting/rejecting dialog boxes into a fun hideAndSeek activity.
Of course, we are dumb... We want KMail to preserve the HTML-layout of the original, when we are replying to or forwarding it. The enlightened developers have been telling us for years, how stupid it is, but we continue to foolishly insist.
If that's not valid grounds for contempt towards users, I don't know, what is.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
What I would really like to see from the GNOME team is a pledge to keep the framework free of unencumbered technology. Specifically, this means we need them to promise that both the framework itself, and its core applications, will not be built with .NET (Mono).
Miguel de Icaza may enjoy appeasing Microsoft, but most of the Free World does not.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Can you prove those 2 statements? Can you provide links to statements where he says that?
You didn't ask that from me but what kind impression I have had from what Aaron has told, is that KDE4 is coming smarter, so there is no need for configurations, because KDE will notice what user wants and leave more easier working enviroment for user when.
Feature and Configuration are two different things.
KDE has lots of features and lots of configurations. Gnome has few features and even less configurations. Now KDE4 will move kde to direction that there will be lots of features but much less configurations. Default look will be very simple and clean so all "dumb" gnome users can use kde easily but power user who knows what wants, can turn things ON and customize whole enviroment.
You know, maybe he chose to be the maintainer because nobody else stepped up and it needed one. He was (is?) a volunteer who donated his own time. You have zero right to demand anything of him. If you want a feature implemented badly, pay someone to do it.
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
I hear this kind of complaint all the time from linux peeps. They want two very different, conflicting things to happen at once. First of all, they want linux to evolve while maintaining all the flexibility that it is known for, while also wanting so desperately for each year to be the "year of the Linux desktop." This is an either/or situation. Gnome and KDE are both aiming to be user-friendly desktops, and therefore shouldn't be criticized because they don't meet the productivity needs of a sysadmin. Like you said, vim, mutt, and wmaker are still around and kickin'.
Similes are like metaphors
All we have is some article that says Gnome 2.30 = Gnome 3. Nothing else. No details, nothing. No details on GTK 3, which will have to happen before Gnome 3, and I'm not sure what problems did affect KDE 4.0's release. .0 releases are what they are, and it was the same story when Gnome 2.0 came along.
Yet no one knows what the long term design plans for Plasma are. The users keep getting surprised, and they feel that Plasma over-promised and under-delivered.
On top of that you have Aaron Segio now suggesting that users should have less control over configuration, fewer choices, and saying that end users are dumb. He also has suggested repeatedly lately that if you're not a coder, then you can't comment on UI issues.
Why don't you ask the Plasma developer*s* (i.e. more than just Aaron)? In addition the KDE feature plans are linked to from the front page of the KDE TechBase. For things not covered there you could add Planet KDE to your news reader or subscribe to the panel-devel mailing list. Want to see all commits made just to plasma? Use the KDE commit filter.
As far as Aaron he's been under a constant heap of criticism lately because Plasma in KDE 4 is not *exactly like* kicker+kdesktop in KDE 3 so perhaps you can excuse him for being irritable. Perhaps you have examples that are not taken out of context however, instead of just claiming that he hates users? On that note was there an announcement that KDE made that you felt over-promised what Plasma would do? If that's happened we at KDE need to get that rectified.
Gnome already has a few of those problems (removing choice, treating users like they're dumb)
Have you ever thought that taking the trouble to make a program easier to use doesn't necessarily imply that the user is dumb? I'd respond to your specific comment except that you have mentioned none.
For corporate environments, or people who can't be troubled to configure things, they just want working defaults and simplicity. That isn't a flame, but rather the way things are.
A system that just works and is simple to use? Oh heavens, no! If GNOME has already achieved that (I haven't used it in awhile) then that is something to be congratulated for. Defaults that work are a good idea in general and are separate from features. Adding more checkboxes doesn't make a program more powerful.
Some people suggested removing the animation, which was a problem because it interfered with maximized windows, and he said no.
The "cashew" would cover up a window whether it's animated or not. :P
Some people suggested allowing people to move or relocate the cashew because it interfered with panels at the top, and he said no.
Not according to this email. Looks to me is that Aaron disagrees with the various methods of removing the cashew that have been proposed so far, and that ways to do so that don't suck haven't been proposed in time for KDE 4.1.
Some people suggested having the cashew disappear when the panel is locked, and he said no.
The panel cashew does disappear when the panel is locked but locking the widgets onto the desktop doesn't get rid of other activities. The way I would think to do that is to have the cashew disappear automatically if the one and only activity has its widgets locked but I don't care enough (I mean seriously, a cashew?) to submit a patch.
The worst thing is he repeatedly said everyone was too stupid to understand his design, which he had no intention of explaining. He said users can't comment on design or UI issues. That is a problem.
In all fairness I think this happened after like the third time he tried to explain the same thing and got the same comments back. You can only answer the same question to X number of different people before you too turn into an asshole. ;)
And besides (this came up later I think) I'm pretty sure the exact perjorative term used was not "stupid" but the email thread gives me emotional baggage so I'm not going to dig it up to double-check.
Anyways KDE appreciates and needs user feedback but what we don't need are personal attacks on our developers from users, which is what led to Aaron-hates-assholes-ivus. Really KDE the project kind of let Aaron down on this because he eventually came to receive quite virulent attacks even about software he doesn't write or maintain just because he's the highest profile KDE developer and no one stepped in to get it from getting out of hand.
Also a recent comment of his was that non-coders on the whole shouldn't be allowed to comment on design issues.
Well this is not going to make it feel any better but those who do not have experience coding often do not understand why their proposed design change does not or cannot work. Not always, but if you're good enough to design it you're typically good enough to code it. Code is just transferring a design into a language syntax. Designing it in the first place to work correctly (or not... ;) is hard.
He also repeatedly said that if you don't read the code, you can't understand the UI. That itself is a problem.
Again, this is probably actually true. Of course you can *see* the UI and point out what sucks about it but sometimes a "trivial" UI change involves a large code change. This is easier to see if you understand how the UI is actually formed from the code in question (i.e. Containments, Applets, Activities, etc. in Plasma-land).
Frankly, end users should be able to pick things up and learn them intuitively. Suggesting that if you don't read the source code, you can't understand the project means there is a serious usability issue.
Sure, but there's also the type of user (and I don't know if this is true in the case you're talking about but bear with me) that does something to the effect of:
User: Hey I noticed this is going on and it sucks, fix it!
Dev: One of:
User: Why don't you just do something like integrate the frobnitz?
Dev: Because it doesn't work like that.
User: No seriously, just integrate here and you're done.
Dev: No you don't get it. The code does not work like that. It cannot work because of reason foo
Now most bug reports we get are good reports and if the dev is actually here to work on it even get resolved to everyone's satisfaction. But we do get reports like these and when it turns into a pissing match between the user and the developer politeness is usually the first thing to go out the window. I've seen Aaron be ganged up on by multiple users in this fashion and it's really disheartening to see as a developer.
Hey, sometimes the developer is even wrong and it can be implemented somehow but that typically happens with a patch (oh, maybe it does work...), which you're not going to get from the same developers by pissing in his Cheerios and acting like a jerk. And in the end (at least in KDE) those who actually do the work get to decide so if Aaron is holding off on changing something because no one has presented a satisfactory technical solution (i.e. no "evil hacks" for bug fixes) then that's how it'll be.