No announcement yet.

Martin Flöser Steps Down As Maintainer Of KDE's KWin

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by msotirov View Post
    This doesn't make any sense. The developer is building a product. It might be a free product but it's still a product that people use. If an overwhelming majority of your product's users want a feature, how is ignoring them "good time management"?
    I never said overwhelming majority, and that's the big point here. If someone wants a particular feature or wants something to behave in a certain way, if they aren't willing to do the work for it to get implemented, then it's up to the developer. If the developer doesn't have the the time or the interest to do it, then it doesn't get done. Part of being interested in implementing a feature is how much it lines up with your visions for the project and being convinced that a feature should be part of the vision by how people clamor for it. The big question is how do you gauge vocal vs majority? A secondary question is, when do you compromise about what you want in a project versus some subset of users? Even if you can do so and it isn't difficult, adding features can be a mistake -- whether it is for making code maintenance more difficult or driving the project in a direction you don't agree with.

    Originally posted by msotirov View Post
    Again, this doesn't make any sense. It might make sense for niche apps – say a sea diving app is going to naturally have less users than a calendar or a todo app but when comparing within the same category the number of users absolutely is an indicator of quality. Quality meaning the software product as a whole and not the "beauty" of your class hierarchy or the indentation of your code.

    The way I see it, the problem of many FOSS projects is that their developers and maintainers don't treat them as products. This often directly results in disgruntled designer contributors and disgruntled users.
    Again, it seems we're talking past each other here. For one, a lot of developers work on a project to scratch their own itch. Their applications are designed in a way that best accommodates what they want out of it, and does other things because other people want those things and the developer finds it interesting to implement it. If we talk about window managers, something like i3 is rather niche until you start digging down deeper into what niche it fills and who it fills it for. That's in contrast with something like KWin, which is specifically aimed at a larger population. They operate in the same field, but because of the market that they're catering towards, they have vastly different sets and sizes of users.

    I'll disagree also with the idea that developers aren't treating their software as a product. The fact that they treat it like a product is evident in the compromises they don't make. A good (and relevant) discussion is this one involving Martin:

    It's very clear from the discussion that Martin cares about the state of KWin and understands the caveats in implementing the initial solution as presented and the landscape of applications that have to be dealt with properly for a satisfying solution.


    • #62
      Originally posted by Sho_ View Post
      That's the thread subject authored by Martin. You'll notice all the mails in the thread have this subject.
      You asked how that conclusion could happen and I gave you an answer. Maybe KDE's Mailman setup should not strip the leading "RE:" for clarity.


      • #63
        Great news. An overrated mediocre developer/drama queen made us a favour and was self-removed from a crucial community project. That guy had more ego than code, and quite frankly he did more harm than good to KDE.


        • #64
          Originally posted by nll_a
          Thanks Martin for all your great work. Kwin is the best part of KDE for me and you are such a huge part of it. I hope everything works out for and that we'll still have you around with your crucial expertise.

          I think KDE is only getting better and I have no personal opinion on this matter. I just want to thank the KDE community for such a fine work and hope your dynamics keeps improving.
          Haha, KWIN is EASILY the WORST part of KDE pal... I don't think you know what you are talking about... He is the reason i am so conflicted with major DEs: I want to use KDE for my workflow, but Kwin is trash, Gnome works so much better. And don't get me started on the 4.x days, ok?


          • #65
            Originally posted by ngraham View Post
            darclide, you have a level of knowledge about these internal projects that makes me think that you're a KDE person I already know. Is that so? I'm Nate Graham BTW.

            In the KCM redesign project, we have consciously avoided removing features. That was not the goal at all. It's a visual and UX overhaul, not a feature removal party. The only feature I'm aware of us removing is the tinting feature from the Icons KCM, because in the porting process it was discovered that the feature was actually broken and would be difficult to fix, and a lack of bug reports indicated that nobody was actually using it. We discussed the matter, and reasoned that users could get the same functionality in other ways already through custom icons and custom icon themes. Again I'm not aware of any other lost features off the top of my head. Can you enlighten me?

            Again, we do NOT want to remove features and customizability. The goal isn't to turn Plasma into GNOME. What we're trying to do is get the best of both worlds: good defaults, attractive presentation, and high usability, all the while keeping the advanced features that our users love. Sometimes this does mean hiding them a bit, but we are NOT removing them. Making our KCMs simpler by default doesn't mean that we've actually removed any features, just that we're trying to make them easier to use.

            I would still appreciate a specific list of gripes because that's actionable for me; I can try to help fix them. I can't do anything with generalities.
            Dude, you don't have to explain anything to those nerds. KDE 5.x has been vastly improved by your team's actions and initiative, and it greatly shows to anyone with eyes you actually bothered to use KDE 4.x series.

            There is a subset of OCD people who think that unless every single pop up window has 5 submenus, 15 toolboxes, and throw some combo lists for fun, then it is "casual" and has "removed features". Those people should just fork KDE and add buttons lists and menus to their hearts content.

            Granted, i was previously a Gnome user, and would still be using Gnome if it handled multiple applications' workflow better for me, but KDE's strength was never this kitchen sink approach of old. I am glad that some sane people like you stepped up and made changes. Keep up the good work!


            • #66
              Originally posted by msotirov View Post
              Well, I for one read his explanation as "I don't like it that I'm not a dictator and I have to debate my decisions with designers".

              I'm grateful for his work but I strongly disagree with him on multiple points:
              - client side decorations
              - his thinking that the focus should be on new features instead of bug fixing and usability fixes

              Well, it's the UI of the operating system. It gets designed before it's implemented.
              Nailed it. Guy has a personality disorder. He was more in it for the drama and attention than because he wanted to create a good compositor. KDE and ALL opensource projects are community driven, if you don't like the community participating in decisions then you don't belong in opensource, period. Even Torvalds steps back from time to time and allows others to do what they wish, because he understands that. Who is this Martin guy? KDE existed before him and will exist after him, and he was not the only contributor FFS.

              What a drama queen!


              • #67
                Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post

                Haha, KWIN is EASILY the WORST part of KDE pal... I don't think you know what you are talking about... He is the reason i am so conflicted with major DEs: I want to use KDE for my workflow, but Kwin is trash, Gnome works so much better. And don't get me started on the 4.x days, ok?
                Erm, do you even know which part of Gnome does the work that KWin is doing on KDE? Or asked differently, do you know what KWin does?

                I really don't think KWin is the worst part of KDE. I could understand if someone said that Plasma is, though I wouldn't say so. Of course you can have your own opinion, whatever that is, but I hope it is based on something.

                Maybe I'm feeding a troll, which I probably shouldn't be doing...


                • #68
                  Originally posted by TemplarGR View Post

                  Haha, KWIN is EASILY the WORST part of KDE pal... I don't think you know what you are talking about... He is the reason i am so conflicted with major DEs: I want to use KDE for my workflow, but Kwin is trash, Gnome works so much better. And don't get me started on the 4.x days, ok?
                  Even if that's true (I believe you exaggerate), you seem to forget that KWIN is also by far the most difficult part of KDE. Without knowing the KDE team I would assume that 95% of the KDE developers cannot even contribute to its code because it needs really good expertise. So, even if you don't agree with Martin's decisions you should at least be grateful for his work...


                  • #69
                    Well, seems as he's just giving up Maintainership, but he'll stick around coding and with no doubt his vast knowledge about KWin and the decisions made. I'm sure David and/or Roman can take over Maintainership (if they choose to). Though, I'm pretty sure there'll have to be a transition phase, a maintainer with the knowledge of Martin isn't easily replaced.

                    Seems he's getting rid of some paint point (maintainership, the discussions with VDG/usability groups, reviewing) to drive on KDE/KWin from a technical point of view (he always stated that his passion goes for the technical implementation and challange, so maybe that's good for him and the project).

                    His step down also shows his passion for the project, actually. He couldn't take it any longer. Martin was always one to have a strong opinion on things, which is part of being maintainer. He obviously got upset fighting pitch-battles for the right solution, which is part of maintainership. Maybe they're right (later in the mails) that splitting maintainership of KWin in several parts is a good idea. It's a beast of a project, and splitting the review and fight responsibility is something to think of, though, that would require a release manager, but they'll manage. It's not as if this guys work together since yesterday.

                    KWin was in a worse state (developer whise) a not so long while ago, while there were contributions by others, the vast amount of work was done by Martin only. That obviously changed which is a positive thing (not following KDE development closely any longer, not a KDE user anymore for very much reasons Martin stated, it's getting feature crowded again as it was in KDE3, and I don't like that, but KWin is a gem, and I am looking to other Desktops to run on top of KWin, lxqt in example).
                    Last edited by STiAT; 05 June 2018, 04:23 AM.


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by ngraham View Post
                      In no way, shape, or form are we unaware of the criticisms or ignoring the issues.
                      you very much do. Maybe not or less so user originating criticism, but the current MO of the VDG seems to be: someone has an idea which is seen as the best thing since sliced bread and accepted without even thinking of possible implications, if that idea follows current applications and or guidelines and if it fits the big picture. You then propose it and go full steam ahead, ignoring all arguments against it or replying with disbelief or "but x and y of the VDG all think it's better", which simply does not invalidate a technical argument.
                      You ignore anything against it and push things forward against criticism and maintainers, this is what happened here, this is what drove and will drive people away.
                      And then, later on, you might notice that it wasn't the best idea but then you can't go back.

                      That's the picture I get by only reading a few of the tickets linked or mentioned.

                      So in addition to the comments already made on what specifically you should change: how the VDG works. Maybe reflect, sit back and wait a bit more, and be more open minded and accepting to arguments that do not fit your current view of the issue at hand.

                      And to answer your previous question (got eaten by forum filters, so I reply to it rather late): Hi Nate, I'm Daniel, I am "only" a concerned user and I don't think we met or know each other, no.