Xfce 4.12 Released After Nearly Three Years Of Work

[Awesomeness]

Completely so fucking wrong. LXDE's marketing strategy is "we're lighter than everyone else". Our marketing strategy is "we're sufficiently light, simple, dependable and flexible for your needs". We do not have the same users. Xfce users talk about how they antagonise KDE or GNOME. Newcomers ask us how to run their KDE or GNOME apps. Not LXDE.

You are a pathetic liar. Your frequent use of ?fucking? just underlines my point. Both LXQt and Xfce want to implement a Win95-style desktop. The difference is that LXQt?s technology advances whereas Xfce stagnates.
You are also lying about their marketing (although it appears you cannot even distinguish between LXDE and LXQt?). According to their latest blog post, LXQt 0.9 uses slightly more RAM than Xfce 4.10: http://blog.lxde.org/?p=1340

Xfce will migrate when Wayland is ready enough.[?]

We've still a long way to go, and there's no hurry.

So in other words you did nothing so far and to cover up for that you downplay the grave security risks of X11.
Yes, there is ? to use your language ? a fucking hurry to migrate to Wayland ASAP!

That's a "we don't have the manpower to do everything so let's let KDE do it" strategy. We'll do almost exactly the same, s/KDE/GNOME/. Most work on Wayland is in GTK+.

Again: Liar.
LXQt and Razor-qt understood that they target the same userbase, so instead of going the typical GTK way of dividing the community until there are dozens of desktops with each only one developer, they cooperated. They also cooperate with other teams on SDDM (i.e. all are actively contributing code, not just let someone else do the work as you claim?).

The only difficulties for us are re-building xfwm

So you did not even begin the Wayland migration and you underestimate the work required for xfwm.

Usually I wouldn't care if you shot yourself and your users in the feet with that attitude but projects like yours are to blame that X11 will likely still be the common denominator in 2020 and that means you?ll be (at least partially) to blame that the security risk of X11 is burdened on other DE?s users for longer than needed.

[ermo]

You are a pathetic liar. (...)

You're being pretty abrasive there dude.

FWIW, I understand that X11 has (serious) issues, but a project of Xfce's size and manpower is probably better off following than leading when it comes to porting to Wayland.

As long as users are aware that X11 has issues, you can't really blame Xfce unless of course you tried to help with the porting effort yourself and got shot down?

I take it you are more an engineering type than a people person who habitually motivates others and drives change by leading by example?

[JS987]

I don't hate Windows but I believe Winfags are pathetic.

I took posts by nanonyme and ihatemichael and replaced word systemd with Windows to show that attack: You are hater if you don't want to use software which Red Hat is trying to force on you
can be used for anything.

[not.sure]

You're being pretty abrasive there dude.

It's the usual developer vs. phoronix reader (=troll) conversation. That's why there are no developers here any more.

[Awesomeness]

As long as users are aware that X11 has issues, you can't really blame Xfce unless of course you tried to help with the porting effort yourself and got shot down?

I take it you are more an engineering type than a people person who habitually motivates others and drives change by leading by example?

What you fanboys don't understand is that the only practical way is less fragmentation, i. e. shut down all those useless niche desktops.
LXQt, Xfce, Cinnamon, Mate, etc. all attempt to achieve the exact same thing: a Win95-style desktop. Of those only LXQt makes technological progress. Therefore the conclusion is clear.

[ermo]

What you fanboys don't understand is that the only practical way is less fragmentation, i. e. shut down all those useless niche desktops.
LXQt, Xfce, Cinnamon, Mate, etc. all attempt to achieve the exact same thing: a Win95-style desktop. Of those only LXQt makes technological progress. Therefore the conclusion is clear.

You are assuming that I am a fanboy. I am not. You are also painting in overly broad strokes.

And frankly, I think you might want to reassess your assertion that Cinnamon is not making technological progress or at least attempt to define what you actually mean by "technological progress"?

I do agree that less fragmentation would be desirable, though. It's just that there is no practical way to impose that -- that is the flipside of the freedom afforded by FLOSS.

I'm genuinely curious about how Ubuntu's vision of a unified Unity DE with a Qt-based SDK + app-store will play out. In the mean time, Cinnamon on Linux Mint LTS appears to have been a runaway success in terms of UI stability and community satisfaction compared to GNOME 3. Personally, I don't quite understand why MATE and Cinnamon don't just join forces, but maybe that's just me. And for the record, Cinnamon is not aiming to re-create Windows 95, just so you know.

Xfce on the other hand I think will continue to live on as a cross-platform livable DE alternative, letting the others bear the brunt of the development pain when migrating to new technologies. Is it a good strategy? Time will tell I suppose.

[Awesomeness]

And frankly, I think you might want to reassess your assertion that Cinnamon is not making technological progress or at least attempt to define what you actually mean by "technological progress"?

https://github.com/linuxmint/Cinnamon/tree/master/src

Do you see it yourself or do I have to explain what all those ?3 years ago? strings mean? ;-)

[curaga]

And most of Linux code comes from pre-git times. Last commit 8 days ago does not a dead project make.

[ermo]

https://github.com/linuxmint/Cinnamon/tree/master/src
Do you see it yourself or do I have to explain what all those ?3 years ago? strings mean? ;-)

That's a fairly narrow definition of technological progress. Just because it's been a while since commits were made to select and sufficiently stable parts of the C source code does not mean that the Cinnamon developers are not making "technological progress". Also, the Cinnamon devs are in no way, shape or form shy about admitting that they ride on the coat-tails of GNOME and Ubuntu LTS when it comes to select parts of their stack.

Now, if you check out e.g. the /js/ui/ subdirectory instead of the /src/ subdirectory, you will see plenty of commits on the UX side of things, which is incidentally also Cinnamon's main focus. But maybe UX development doesn't count as "technological progress" in your view?

FWIW, I applaud the Cinnamon developers for focusing on the JS parts of the stack that enables them to deliver rapid UX improvements to end users with a fairly low developer headcount. They're punching well above their weight in my book.