Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GNOME Files/Nautilus Search Is Finally Being Overhauled

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

  • #21
    You know, I'd be happy with gnome 3 if it actually functioned as a touch screen desktop, and they got their *stuff* together (its a lot of *stuff* going on in there). That would actually justify its UI and toolkit.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by justmy2cents View Post
      have you ever considered that some of us like it just the way it is
      Funny how you used my argument as a counterargument.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by justmy2cents View Post
        i'm just saying that gnome developers have design in mind, some users like it, some don't. but, the difference in designs would make completely impossible to satisfy both groups. this simply can't be done without making some people unhappy and some excited.
        Ummm. I think you found the proper solution.

        -A bit more level of customization. So anyone could configure the things at its way and not at one predefined paradigma.

        I'm happy with the actual state of the desktop, but I think it would be good that bit more.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by magika View Post
          Funny how you used my argument as a counterargument.
          and how is that? maybe, with tendency to cut of relevant part and then go on some new claims.

          my claim before that sentence "i couldn't care less on what you use or prefer, this is up to you" and both are followed by "i'm not saying i'm right here, i'm just saying that gnome developers have design in mind, some users like it, some don't"

          where on the other hand, you act like 5 year old child being forced to the dentist and like your way is the only way since in your head you probably think that if you don't like something, no one does

          if your vision aligns with developers, good. if not... well, it sucks to be you. but, developers should always work on things they deem as well spent time, not just work by demand and you still have a choice of other desktops where developers think like you

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by DebianLinuxero View Post

            Ummm. I think you found the proper solution.

            -A bit more level of customization. So anyone could configure the things at its way and not at one predefined paradigma.

            I'm happy with the actual state of the desktop, but I think it would be good that bit more.
            not everyone would agree with that. for me, i can't stand KDE just because it is so configurable that they can't even put one decent default out.

            and here is a question. what is "a bit more"? question is simple as everyone would see their own bits they would like a bit different and if you wanted to satisfy them all, you'd end up with KDE like clusterfuck of gazillion settings

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by justmy2cents View Post

              and how is that? maybe, with tendency to cut of relevant part and then go on some new claims.

              my claim before that sentence "i couldn't care less on what you use or prefer, this is up to you" and both are followed by "i'm not saying i'm right here, i'm just saying that gnome developers have design in mind, some users like it, some don't"

              where on the other hand, you act like 5 year old child being forced to the dentist and like your way is the only way since in your head you probably think that if you don't like something, no one does

              if your vision aligns with developers, good. if not... well, it sucks to be you. but, developers should always work on things they deem as well spent time, not just work by demand and you still have a choice of other desktops where developers think like you
              Here you go, either not reading stuff or not understaing core of the problem.
              It is largely irrelevant whether some people like that software now.
              Lets investigate chain of events:
              -GNOME2, people use it for work, people like the way it is. But innovation is okay, lets make a GNOME Shell, GTK3 and else, stuff like that is not counterproductive.
              -A bunch of people, that is apparently in charge of open source project, decided to break it the way they want, despite negative reaction from community. Removing features that don't hurt anyone is not okay and is counter productive. Suddenly, the work you could do with it you cannot do it anymore.
              -Here were are arguing and some people say they like things the way they now. Its okay, damage dealt can't be undone.

              Yea and last thing: that argument about developers doing the things they want, it just doesn't work. I dont pay them for software, its opensource. But if I become a developer myself (its LGPLed), and "work on things I deem as well spent time, not just work by demand", and, say, bring back "Compact View" into Nautilus, that got removed just because one guy doesn't like it, it won't get accepted. Simply because small bunch of people decides what I want.

              We understand you, who like things the way they are now, you don't want to understand us. But its okay, when GNOME4 comes and same people break your GNOME3 again, we will be together

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by magika View Post
                Here you go, either not reading stuff or not understaing core of the problem.
                You're confusing your personal opinion with facts. I help out with GNOME. It's nice and all that you think that you can tell me what to do with my time, but if I flat out ignore you, then I'm not rude. Note that Nautilus is not LGPL and there's MATE.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by magika View Post
                  Here you go, either not reading stuff or not understaing core of the problem.
                  It is largely irrelevant whether some people like that software now.
                  Lets investigate chain of events:
                  -GNOME2, people use it for work, people like the way it is. But innovation is okay, lets make a GNOME Shell, GTK3 and else, stuff like that is not counterproductive.
                  -A bunch of people, that is apparently in charge of open source project, decided to break it the way they want, despite negative reaction from community. Removing features that don't hurt anyone is not okay and is counter productive. Suddenly, the work you could do with it you cannot do it anymore.
                  -Here were are arguing and some people say they like things the way they now. Its okay, damage dealt can't be undone.

                  Yea and last thing: that argument about developers doing the things they want, it just doesn't work. I dont pay them for software, its opensource. But if I become a developer myself (its LGPLed), and "work on things I deem as well spent time, not just work by demand", and, say, bring back "Compact View" into Nautilus, that got removed just because one guy doesn't like it, it won't get accepted. Simply because small bunch of people decides what I want.

                  We understand you, who like things the way they are now, you don't want to understand us. But its okay, when GNOME4 comes and same people break your GNOME3 again, we will be together
                  which is wrong how? it is not like those sources people like you like would be removed. if anything, this move lead to what?
                  - new design is obviously majority, where they follow strict "by-design" policy. and i agree completely with them here, something like Compact view should not be accepted if it doesn't fit in the picture. no matter if someone provides patch or not
                  - people who wanted old design started MATE
                  - people that didn't like new nautilus shift started Nemo

                  i'd call this win/win/win situation.

                  you just need to pick the ones you want instead of trying of forcing what you want where developers don't agree with you. no project should ever accept patch just because there is one. blind accept would mean they have no clear picture on what they actually want. same thing as i completely agree with why wine does not accept galium nine. this doesn't say i agree with every statement, but when i consider Gnome3, i love their changes.

                  as far as Gnome4 breaking everything. i kind of doubt this. one reason why Gtk3/Gnome3 broke so many things was complete design shift and that was said from day 1. v3 is a full development release from the start.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by magika View Post
                    Removing features that don't hurt anyone is not okay and is counter productive.
                    Quite frankly, that's bullshit.
                    Those "features" need to be maintained. They need to be adapted to shifting design paradigms.

                    What's really counterproductive is simply stacking endless legacy feature sets, for the sake of compatibility.
                    Sometimes you have to cut away the fat and start over.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X