Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Vincent Untz Goes Over The Direction Of GNOME

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • phoronix
    started a topic Vincent Untz Goes Over The Direction Of GNOME

    Vincent Untz Goes Over The Direction Of GNOME

    Phoronix: Vincent Untz Goes Over The Direction Of GNOME

    Aside from all the Phoronix video recordings of the X.Org and Wine development rooms during the FOSDEM 2013 meeting last weekend in Brussels, Vincent Untz went over the direction of GNOME and whether the GNOME community has gone crazy...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI5Nzg

  • kigurai
    replied
    Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
    The kernel has the very important rule: We don't break userland.
    Userland is what makes the kernel into an OS. Pretty similar like many people claim that extensions are the one thing that make Gnome Shell usable for them. So you can see extensions in a way as Gnome userland, but Gnome developers (and GTK developers also, just ask some developers that use GTK putside of Gnome, or even people designing GTK themes) have no problem with breaking userland, regularly. They just don't care and some people even think that this is intentional, since anything not Gnome will not be accepted, in fear of damaging the Gnome brand.
    Some people also think that the current effort of using extensions to get a classic mode is not because the Gnome developers finally hear what their users want, but to bring the extensions that are used anyways by Gnome users under control of the Gnome brand, to eliminate non-Gnome things on Gnome.
    I specifically mentioned kernel modules, and said nothing of userland.
    I think extensions should be considered the same as kernel modules in this case, since they are tightly coupled to Gnome-Shell and modify its core behaviour.

    Whether GTK+ has broken API or not is irrelevant for this discussion.
    Last edited by kigurai; 02-17-2013, 03:54 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vim_User
    replied
    Originally posted by kigurai View Post
    I am not sure why the lack of a stable API is anything to be upset about though. The kernel has the same policy, and everyone seems to agree that this is a good thing.
    I think the same reasoning is applicable in this case.
    The kernel has the very important rule: We don't break userland. Userland is what makes the kernel into an OS. Pretty similar like many people claim that extensions are the one thing that make Gnome Shell usable for them. So you can see extensions in a way as Gnome userland, but Gnome developers (and GTK developers also, just ask some developers that use GTK putside of Gnome, or even people designing GTK themes) have no problem with breaking userland, regularly. They just don't care and some people even think that this is intentional, since anything not Gnome will not be accepted, in fear of damaging the Gnome brand.
    Some people also think that the current effort of using extensions to get a classic mode is not because the Gnome developers finally hear what their users want, but to bring the extensions that are used anyways by Gnome users under control of the Gnome brand, to eliminate non-Gnome things on Gnome.

    If that is really the case, I can't say, but when you see some statements of Gnome developers and their behavior one could think that this is not so far from the truth, that to them the brand is more worth than the userbase.

    Leave a comment:


  • kigurai
    replied
    Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
    So now it is important which functionality is made accessible through an API when we want to determine if it even is an API?
    Well, of course it is an API, no one is contesting that.
    But I think you could argue that not all API are alike.
    On the one hand you have APIs like, say GTK+ or Qt, which are rigidly defined and guaranteed to not break between versions.
    Then you have stuff like the Linux kernel where you of course have an API, but it is not guaranteed to be stable between even minor version numbers.
    GNOME-shell extensions fall in the latter category.

    I have shown you a link to a blog post from a Gnome developer describing that what he calls "the extension API" and where he decribes that they will break it if they want to. No superpowers needed, I have backed up my claims, time for you to do the same.
    The API that broke in this case was that the mechanism for loading the extensions was changed. There is still no stable API for Gnome-Shell.

    I am not sure why the lack of a stable API is anything to be upset about though. The kernel has the same policy, and everyone seems to agree that this is a good thing.
    I think the same reasoning is applicable in this case.

    Leave a comment:


  • Vim_User
    replied
    Originally posted by kigurai View Post
    If you actually read more than the title, you would realize that this "API" is the same type of API that you have with Linux kernel modules. It defines extension loading/unloading and preference handling, but not how to access the functionality of the host.
    So now it is important which functionality is made accessible through an API when we want to determine if it even is an API?

    True. Unless of course mr vim kan provide us with a link to a well defined and documented API.. Show us your super powers vim.
    I have shown you a link to a blog post from a Gnome developer describing that what he calls "the extension API" and where he decribes that they will break it if they want to. No superpowers needed, I have backed up my claims, time for you to do the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • funkSTAR
    replied
    Originally posted by kigurai View Post
    If you actually read more than the title, you would realize that this "API" is the same type of API that you have with Linux kernel modules. It defines extension loading/unloading and preference handling, but not how to access the functionality of the host.
    AFAICT extensions still have unlimited access to the Shell, without any kind of "extension API".
    True. Unless of course mr vim kan provide us with a link to a well defined and documented API.. Show us your super powers vim.

    Leave a comment:


  • kigurai
    replied
    Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
    Funny, Gnome developers see that differently: http://blog.mecheye.net/2012/02/more...on-api-breaks/

    So this developer is clearly speaking of an API (and breaking it) that you claim doesn't even exist. Maybe you don't know as much about Gnome as you think?
    If you actually read more than the title, you would realize that this "API" is the same type of API that you have with Linux kernel modules. It defines extension loading/unloading and preference handling, but not how to access the functionality of the host.
    AFAICT extensions still have unlimited access to the Shell, without any kind of "extension API".

    Leave a comment:


  • Vim_User
    replied
    Originally posted by funkSTAR View Post
    API on extensions? WTF!? Extensions alter existing gs code, there is no API.
    Funny, Gnome developers see that differently:
    but we didn?t want to change the extension API
    That was the only API break that I inserted into the extension system for 3.2
    While I hate to break API, I?d say it?s for the better.
    We now have a usable API for settings from extensions.
    http://blog.mecheye.net/2012/02/more...on-api-breaks/

    So this developer is clearly speaking of an API (and breaking it) that you claim doesn't even exist. Maybe you don't know as much about Gnome as you think?

    Leave a comment:


  • funkSTAR
    replied
    Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
    It may also be clear evidence that Gnome developers don't care about compatibility and break their APIs regularly.
    API on extensions? WTF!? Extensions alter existing gs code, there is no API. If you dont like the code to change, DONT CHANGE YOUR GNOME VERSION. Im sure the gnome devs are truly sorry for doing real work.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sinayion
    replied
    Victor knows how to ignore everyone

    This guy is an example of someone who should shut up, listen to his users, and never ever try championing his cause until he decides to get off his ego. There are a myriad of user comments ever since Gnome 3 came out, and even during its alpha/beta phases. Hell, I myself also had concerns during the beta, but I liked the original ideas. But then Gnome developers started removing feature after feature.

    Instead, he dismisses all the comments/feedback by saying that "these people just like to hate the world", and then picks on individuals in the audience very sneakily by trying to guide them to liking Gnome 3 by default, and making them laugh.

    Gnome 3 is not the best desktop, and it is not the worst desktop. What it is, is a desktop and group of people that refuse to see potential improvements to a product that could blow everything else out of the water. Instead, they focused from he start to the tablet fad, and now that the desktop is not dead, they shot themselves in the foot. They constantly remove features and claim that users can add them back by editing files. Had they simply minimalised the initial experience, and enabled/disabled said options via the GUI, no one would have cared much.

    Apparently, as he says, they could not put all the options in the UI, because "it would be impossible". Well, then the KDE developers must be gods; they seem to manage it.

    And then he says that he works at SUSE; the Linux distribution/company that has embraced KDE almost more than any other for a very long time.

    Victor Untz, the man almost as insane as certain kernel developers that force their personal beliefs. You are a bully of the worst kind. You force your opinion on people's daily experiences with their computer, instead of allowing them to choose their way. Gnome 3 was not ready, just like KDE4 was not ready, The difference between them and you: they were upfront about it and users were warned about future wished features.

    For those that brave the video, notice his motions/tone when he talks about the fixes/changes. He is such a condescending ass to his users.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X