GNOME is dead, long life to Gnome.

GNOME is dead. OK, not yet, really but it’s walking through a narrow street that is leading there.

Why? No, not exactly, the problem isn’t GNOME/Gnome OS. Someone wants ape Android with a new OS? Welcome! I hear the laughs out a mile, but it is free software, or it should be so.
Welcome. That is the question. I consider myself a relatively new born in FLOSS, but the most important lesson I’ve learned is collaboration. And coopetition too, why not. We’re different from each other, we think, talk, have different opinions, visions, ideas. But we respect. We DO respect.

The importance of a code of conduct.

The existence of a GNOME Code of Conduct Anti Signature page,  shows without the needing of other words what some (a few I hope) GNOME people think about code of conduct.
That should be probably trivial,  but it reflects a misbehavior that is coming every day more usual and could be summarized in: I have right, you are wrong, whoever you could be. In Italy we call that “celodurismo” (“I have it hard”-ism) maybe the ground grade of a machism frustrated and powerless.

Now a simple question for everyone.
I’m talking to developer and maintainers: how long and why a developer should swallow that her/his work has to be submitted to someone who decides what is right and what is wrong refusing every suggestions only because he is right?
I think that we in Ubuntu should learn this lesson well. We have a code of conduct, we have an anti-harassment code, we are people first. To grow again we have to maintain our inclusive way to be. That is our, Ubuntu strength, our respect for everyone. Distro are useless? Distro only make packages and pretend to contribute to FLOSS? I smile. Please, please, remain there, laughing alone.

Advertisements

37 thoughts on “GNOME is dead, long life to Gnome.

      • I think I got you. In recent times I’ve been let down not only be Ubuntu but by other FOSS developers in how things are handled. Everyone is functioning like “my way or the highway”, and kicking users out on the street if they don’t want to submit to what the developers dictate.

        I hope that both Ubuntu and GNOME can realize this (and many other developers) and stop treating users this way.

  1. I agree completely. You’ve hit the nail on the head. GNOMErs should stop bashing Canonical for the Contributor Agreement and look at themselves first. Their situation on that front is worse.

  2. Uhm, I’m not sure about what you’re exactly referring to, anyway someone has to make decisions. In GNOME maintainers do, since they are in that position for the amount of work put in the bits of code they are working on. There is simply nothing wrong with that. Every time you ask for a feature, you write some code to be included, you propose an idea, you’re basically asking other people to make some work for you, so if the maintainer is happy with your proposal/code/idea/whatever and it’s interesting enough to became a priority for him he will do that work otherwise he won’t, pretty simple. It is not really about being right or wrong.
    If your code/idea/feature request is not ok with the maintainer you can fork the software and do that work by yourself, this is oss, this is freedom, but you can’t expect people to be willing to work for you all the time.

    • Dear Lapo, I totally agree with you. Really I’m not against GNOME OS, I am curious to know/see what it will be, what will be the target to whom it may refer. A new challenge is always exciting. But I strongly believe that the strength of FLOSS, based as you say on volunteers, is collaboration. An example? Deja-dup. Another? Empathy, whose functions – I guess – will be soon so integrated in GNOME Shell to be excluded as stand alone project.

      • People using GNOME doesn’t really care about empathy, nautilus, evolution, whatever, what matters are the funcionality offered, and the more integration the better from an user point of view, same interfaces scattered around the platform means that the whole thing is easier to understand and use.
        Also integration means working toghether so there’s more collaboration which is a win as well. I really see no downfalls in integrating bits and pieces.

  3. Pingback: Mejoras que veremos, seguramente, en Gnome 3.2 « Soft-Libre

  4. Quote: “I think that we in Ubuntu should learn this lesson well. …. To grow again we have to
    maintain our inclusive way to be. That is our, Ubuntu strength, our respect for
    everyone”

    You have a hell of a lot of work to do if this is your aim!

    Last month Ubuntu fell to third place in the distro popularity stakes as people moved to other distros either for something like their old desktop (ie. to xfce / lxde), or for the new Gnome desktop (ie. to fedora or opensuse). Whatever their destination, it was away from Unity and the current Ubuntu meglamania.

    If you want to be inclusive, you can start by having 11.10 install both Unity and Gnome Shell, with the default session set to Gnome 3 (without shell). That way people can choose. That way you respect the user’s wishes.

    There has never been any need for Gnome to bend to Unity’s wishes or vice-versa. They can co-reside, along with kde, xfce etc, with each offering something to a different type of user. Ubuntu’s strategy of forcing the user to use Unity whether they want to or not, is the single greatest mark of disrespect that they could ever have perpetrated, and will stick in the throat of many of its users for many years to come.

    Having used Ubuntu for so long, I like many, have stayed in the hope that it will return to sanity soon. But such loyalty only lasts so long. At this point in time, you should be worrying less about “growing again” and more about how to stop the flood of losses increasing.

    • Precisely what Duncan said. The disrespect Ubunteros has had for many persons has been evident for years. This just demonstrates it to more persons at once.

    • This is funny, yet another example of my way(gnome first!), or the highway…
      Canonical really needs to dumb gnome/gtk altogether. Qt is right around the korner, and the kde people would k’love it.
      Nothing against gtk, but now that Qt is at last ‘semi’ orphaned then why not harbor it?

      • You completely miss the point. My argument was that every way should be equally available – not one over the other. And yes, by all means, kde as well.

        Currently on 11.04, I can choose Unity or Classic Ubuntu which is a buggy version of Gnome 2 heavily hacked in order to include Unity features, or screw both up and install Gnome3. I was also forced to remove xfce in order to upgrade. That is not choice.

        As for using Gnome 3 (without shell) as the default. That is the lowest common denominator, since both Gnome-Shell AND Unity are both shells running on top of the Gnome 3 desktop. Installing Ubuntu (as opposed to Kubuntu) is, after all, to choose GTK/Gnome.

      • As for using Gnome 3 (without shell) as the default. That is the lowest common denominator, since both Gnome-Shell AND Unity are both shells running on top of the Gnome 3 desktop

        If your reference is Ubuntu 11.04, this statement is wrong.

    • Ubuntu’s strategy of forcing the user to use Unity whether they want to or not, is the single greatest mark of disrespect

      KDE people wanted KDE4, so was it forced? GNOME people wanted to come with new generation gnome-shell, so was it forced? Ubuntu people wanted to come out with Unity, so was it forced? Actually you have Unity 3D, Unity 2D and gnome-shell available in Oneiric. How is this forcing. Basically I understand what you want to say to Ubuntu – “You people suck because you do not do as I please. How come you don’t follow my orders”. Get over your high horse.

      hope that it will return to sanity soon

      What insanity? Any piece of software takes time to stabilize. Go and write one, you will understand. As I told, your definition of insanity is something you don’t like

      …and about Aoirthoir – I won’t reply to that troll. A well known troll.

      • Definition of troll: someone that disagrees with your point of view, especially if they use facts to demonstrate why your position is incorrect. Hey, you’re right, by that definition I am a troll.

        And, sorry but you called my name, so you did reply to me.

      • @Aoirthoir
        Well, using a wrong definition of trolling is also trolling. Yes, you are troll. Trolls don’t need any valid reason. They do it for wasting other’s time. Their favourite work is “bitching”. You qualify.

      • You really should read what people say and not decide that you know “what they want to say”.
        I haven’t asked Ubuntu to follow my dictates – I have asked to be allowed to make choices of my own – not have them dictated, or undermined, by Ubuntu.

        And yes, under Oneiric I can finally make some choices again – after six months (probably a year by the time you guys have removed the bugs).

        You also presume too much. I have been programming in the commercial world since – judging by your picture – before you were born. And let me tell you – stabilisation of software occurs BEFORE general release – not afterwards.

      • No Manish Sinha I use the accurate definition of trolling. As Duncan said you really should read what people say and not decide for them what they want to say (or in my case their motivations for saying). Your liking or not the facts that I state won’t change that they are facts and it most certainly wont inform as to my motives. That’s the mistake too many folks make, thinking they know what another person is thinking or feeling.

        As in this case. You might be perfectly happy with the changes that have come to Ubuntu. Great for you. I imagine I WILL be happy when two things happen:

        1. Choice returns (and it will). So that way I can make my computer operate the way I want it to, and not have it dictated to me how it has to work.

        2. The bugs in Unity will be worked out (and they will be).

        But in the meantime we get to not like what we don’t like, whether you decide that makes us trolls or not.

        Finally Duncan makes a fine point about your presumptuousness. I can’t say for Duncan, but I’ve been programming since 1986. And the long and the short of it? As fat, toothless and old as I get, I’m still gonna be purdier than all of yall combined.

      • @Duncan
        You want me to remove my old picture? Okay. I will change it
        Can you tell me where your choices have not been respected? Natty was a transition release. It contained Unity, due to migration/transition and buggy packaging you could not get gnome-shell. So this was your pet peeve?

        I don’t assume too much. I just read and made the inference. This was your defense? Saying I twist your words? Seriosuly?

        Stabilization of software happens before release? Like developing for 10 years and then releasing when it is irrelevant. You also know that after releasing it in the wild, the amount of bug reports flowing it is greatly beneficial for any software. Remember how pulseaudio was pushed which actually was boon in disguise. If we all were waiting for pulseaudio to stabilize, it would still be broken as it would not have been tested in real scenarios.

        @Aoirthoir
        Have you ever said anything positive till now?
        All the comments I have seen till date are negative and show that you are pissed off heavily.

        No! I am not happy with all the changes which have come to Ubuntu, but I atleast know that bitching around will not change anything.

        Bugs in Unity would be worked around. You know it was just 5 months old when it was released. If you have been programming since 1986 you would have known that this is not enough time for something to stabilize like gnome-panel. Secondly why it was released half-baked, I told in the reply to Duncan.

        Both,
        Sorry, I don’t believe that writing comments like “it will return to sanity soon” like I know what everyone thinks. You accuse me of this, but you yourself did that.Or comments like this – “Your weakness is that you THINK you have respect for everyone”

  5. I’ve been using Unity now on my main computer since the release 11.04

    It just doesn’t work om desktop machines at all well, apart from the occasional bug (but more frequent than I had with Gnome 2) there are just things that don’t work for me, I really don’t like, and with every passing day that dislike grows the scroll mechanism, I have 3×28″ monitors on my main PC, saving those 7 or 8 pixel width just doesn’t matter.

    I find the menu thing (not the left hand side bar, but the Ubuntu button thing) hides way too much from, I have acres of screen real estate but there I am struggling to find what I want because it shows so little, give me an old style drop down menu any day of the week.

    The icons are too big, and as I’ve got wide monitors I want the left hand menu thing on the bottom.

    In short I want Gnome 2 back, sorry I gave Unity a good go, I’ve constantly told myself I will get used to it and it will be better. Well some aspects I’m getting used to, but it ain’t better thats for sure.

    • We’ve stuck with Ubuntu 10.04 for now. We’ll see what transpires in the next year or so as they wiork out the kinks of Unity. If they get them fixed, with CONFIGURABILITY in mind, so we can all get back to deciding what our own desktops should look and work like, we might upgrade. But there’s a great chance we’re just going to move to XCFE. I’ve had too many customers and potential customers tell me plainly NO in regards to Unity, for some of the issues you’ve mentioned, others have mentioned and they have mentioned on their own.

  6. Choosing Unity over something else as default is not disrespect to the people who are technically able and personally interested to re-install the PC with Fedora or OpenSUSE.

    Choosing Unity as default is a move to leave the over-saturated geek/nerd market behind, diving headfirst into the unserved mom-and-pop market.

    [Full disclosure: I run testing at home since the last millenium and windows 7 at work and I couldn’t care less about Ubuntus’s defaults.]

  7. “Choosing Unity over something else as default is not disrespect to the people who are technically able and personally interested to re-install the PC with Fedora or OpenSUSE.”

    Well sure, if you’re not trying to keep them as users. But the claim that moving away from something people already know how to use as mom and pop users (ageism much?), is entirely specious. The ones MOST LIKELY to figure out Unity and start liking it are the techs. Gnome is different enough from Windows and Mac to drive average users right back, and those differences are tiny. Move them to something completely opposite of what they have grown used to, with no frame of reference for the change, and yeah, they’re not likely to be the market you are serving.

  8. @Manish Sinha
    I really don’t care about your photograph – I am sure that you are as handsome now as you ever were. I mentioned it merely as justification for my “assumption” as to our relative ages.

    Flavia’s article concerned how to get over the PR disaster of recent times in which Gnome, Ubuntu, and their supporters have spent far too much time vilifying each other across the net. A PR disaster which has resulted in a split in the community and reduction in Ubuntu’s popularity and prestige. Something which Flavia wants to put right.

    PR is about perceptions even more than reality. My point was that you have to do more than just SAY that you are going to “play nicely” from now on. You have to DO something to back your fine words and to demonstrate in concrete terms your willingness to move forward – regardless of whether Gnome responds or nor.

    My original statement proposed (as part of the solution) a return to a situation of EQUALITY and CHOICE, with no option treated as a second class citizen. It is not possible to “infer” from this that I really wanted to say that you should have preferred one over the other.

    There are three classes of Ubuntu/Gnome users (as opposed to the xfce and kde camps) – pro-Unity, pro-Gnome-Shell, AND those that don’t like either. I am of the latter camp. Again, you assumed that because I don’t love Unity, I really want Gnome-Shell. This is not true and cannot be inferred from what I have said. I recognize that there are three points of view and wish all three to be allowed their choice.

    Putting all three options on the default installation (and guaranteeing that they all work properly – unlike Natty), with the user able to choose whichever they want from day one, is a clear statement of Ubuntu’s having risen above the squabbles of the past and offering itself once again as an inclusive community capable of respecting differing opinions. This is a positive proposal. It is not biased. From the moment that a user logs in, he/she is presented with hard evidence of the fact that “his/her opinion and choice is equally valued”.

    Making some users second-class citizens by “allowing” them to install other options (with no guarantee that they will be compatible), gives the impression that Ubuntu still has the attitude that it and only it is right, and the only reason why the user is even given this option is because Ubuntu fears losing further users. Remember that 2 out 3 of your user categories feel unloved and dispossessed. It doesn’t matter whether you think that they have reason to feel this way or whether this was your intention or not, the perception exists and if you want to reverse the current trend (which is what Flavia’s article is about), you need to go out of your way to change that perception. My proposal is the first step in doing so.

    The word “insanity” really appears to have upset you, but I can’t think of a better word. Ubuntu was the largest (and rapidly growing) linux-based community with a reputation for inclusiveness, user choice, the quality of its upgrades, and a stated goal of even greater expansion. The posturing and actions of both Ubuntu and Gnome have split the community into quarreling factions. Natty reduced people’s choice to bug-ridden Unity or Unity-modified Gnome2, and was the worst upgrade ever produced (to quote one reviewer). The result is that people are leaving – to xfce, kde, Gnome-shell with Fedora etc, or back to Gnome2 with LinuxMint, which is currently being installed on more machines than Ubuntu according to DistroWatch. Given your starting position and stated goals, these are not the actions of sane people.

    —–

    Your example of PulseAudio is not an equivalent case. This was a separate module which could be installed or not, switched on or off, and which had no effect on any other part of the system when switched off. This is not the same as a shell such as Unity, the effectiveness of which modifies every aspect of your computer usage.

    And yes, I can boot into Ubuntu Classic and turn the Compiz Unity-plugin off, but that doesn’t get rid of the bad effects of Unity, which exist as patches and hacks across the OS, causing crashes and glitches with Gnome 2 software which worked perfectly before, and even with Compiz itself, the updated (for Unity) version of which randomly runs CPUs at 100%, causes memory leaks etc. And no, I can’t go back to my previous working version of Compiz because of package dependencies with Unity which I don’t use. Result – Its no longer wise for me to run Compiz. I am not alone in this – it is a common complaint and one that is getting worse with each update of Unity/Compiz on Oneiric. I do not doubt that this will be fixed eventually. Such problems are to be expected in alpha or even beta versions. But not release versions.

    At the other end of the scale, consider the Overlay Sliders. They are not part of Gnome 2 and therefore should not appear in Ubuntu Classic, but they do – or at least sometimes. Despite the fact that from day one, people have requested a means of turning these off – for reasons of visual or physical impairment as well as just personal taste – there is no simple and clean way of doing so. I can edit the Xsession.d file, but this only works some of the time. I can remove the overlay library, but this will be re-installed every time Unity is updated, despite the fact that it is canceled in my Synaptic manager. I have no choice to put up with random swaps between traditional and overlay. I can’t even choose Overlay as the default because they don’t work in most software, or only sometimes.

    Can I remove Unity until the problems are solved? No. Or at least I have not been able to find anyone who has achieved this without first installing Gnome-shell to replace it, which is hardly the point. There are dozens of situations where users have had facilities taken off them (such as Compiz), or are forced to use features that they don’t want (such as the overlay sliders). Whilst the overall reliability of their system has diminished. These are not stabilization issues – they are software planning and implementation errors. They could have – and should have – been dealt with before release. Software Engineering 101 – always have a WORKING on/off button for new features which leaves NO side effects.

    You say that the alternative to careful release management is “10 years” delay. A slight exaggeration? According to Ubuntu, Oneiric will solve most of our problems, so we are only talking about a 6 month delay at worst. Do you really think that asking users to wait a few extra weeks in order to get something that works and which isn’t going to cost them enormous time and effort is so terrible? Or did the desire to match Gnome3’s release date, override every other consideration? I think perhaps that you underestimate your users. They do recognize and appreciate the enormous work which went into getting Natty to release status (because the beta really was a dog), and would consider it quite reasonable to delay release until it was actually stable. They would accept modules temporarily not working on some particular hardware and features that have not yet reached fruition, as long as they can switch off any offending part and use their machine in the meantime as before. Many will even be happy to switch these options on and report to you those (as you say) very important bug reports, as long as they can switch them off when they need the computer to work – just like they could with PulseAudio.

    —-

    As I stated in my first entry to this discussion, I have stayed with Ubuntu rather than just giving up on it (as many of my colleagues have) because I believe that matters will eventually resolve themselves – both in terms of software and PR. However, Oneiric will be a water-shed for many people. It will either crystalize negativity towards Ubuntu (which will last for many years), or create a deep sigh of relief that everything is going to be ok. It doesn’t matter whether Gnome responds equally or not, it doesn’t matter what has happened in the past, as long as Ubuntu gets the message right: not in words but in concrete terms. The first place that people will see this message is in the DM in the form of working (not like Natty) options for all three groups of people. The second place is in user control of options – the ability to choose what goes where and if it goes anywhere at all. You show your respect for people’s opinions not by “graciously allowing” them to install other options “if they really must”, but offering them the an appropriate range from which they may choose and making sure that those choices work. And if you really can’t stabilize a feature before release, you give it a big on/off button. Get your PR guys working on a new slogan along the lines of “Ubuntu – by the people for ALL the people” and mean it.

    • Just a tiny observation after this huge comment: you presume all people installing Ubuntu already knows about GNOME Shell and Unity, their respective differencies, their respective strongness (i.e. something like linux installer in late ’90, with KDE/GNOME selection). Or, if not, a small 30 words description could allow those people to perform a smart choice and cut the gordian knot. Do you feel it reasonable?

  9. “@Aoirthoir
    Have you ever said anything positive till now?”

    Critiquing is not negative. Well, except to persons who refuse to acknowledge their own mistakes.

    “All the comments I have seen till date are negative and show that you are pissed off heavily.”

    Here you go again telling another grown man what he feels. Because I address issues of interest to me does not mean I am “pissed off”. But why let ME tell you what I feel when you can just decide for me what I feel. And critiquing your doing so isn’t “being negative”. The ridiculousness of Ubunteros who object to OTHERS critiquing them is laid bare by the fact that they are none to often critiquing others (yourself included). So no, I won’t accept policing of my language from you for doing the very same thing that you are doing. In fact IN THIS COMMENT SECTION.

    “No! I am not happy with all the changes which have come to Ubuntu, but I atleast know that bitching around will not change anything.”

    Uh huh. Stating what I dislike about Unity is not “bitching”. But you know, I bet the usual suspects aren’t going to say a word about your language choice here. You could have said “complaining” but that would not have been a negative enough word for you?

    “Bugs in Unity would be worked around. You know it was just 5 months old when it was released. If you have been programming since 1986 you would have known that this is not enough time for something to stabilize like gnome-panel. Secondly why it was released half-baked, I told in the reply to Duncan.”

    The issue is not that they released Unity with bugs. Duncan and I made it VERY CLEAR that is not what our objections are about. The issue is the REMOVAL OF CHOICE OF OTHER OPTIONS. And it’s not just in Unity either. This keeps happening. I THOUGHT it had been settled, and they had stopped. I was wrong.

    “Both,
    Sorry, I don’t believe that writing comments like “it will return to sanity soon” ”

    I don’t write comments like that. That would be ableist, something the Ubuntu community practices to no end.

    “like I know what everyone thinks. You accuse me of this, but you yourself did that.”

    No, I myself did not do that.

    “Or comments like this – “Your weakness is that you THINK you have respect for everyone””

    Sorry but NO. This is entirely a false claim. The AUTHOR (not you) made a statement. I responded TO THE AUTHOR. It is perfectly reasonable if someone says “I like how chocolate tastes” to conclude that they THINK chocolate tastes good. Just as it is reasonable since the AUTHOR SAID “Ubuntu respects everyone” to conclude that they THINK Ubuntu respects everyone. My reply therefore is NOT telling the author what they think.

    NOR is my reply telling people WHAT THEY THINK. It is untenable to conclude that ANY GROUP respects EVERYONE. Saying that plainly is not telling people what they think. Good try there Sparky. Next time try using FACTS. Something I know many Ubunteros avoid in their commentary. Oh, and that’s NOT telling you what you THINK, that’s commenting on what you’ve WRITTEN.

  10. @Aoirthoir

    I haven’t said “Ubuntu respects everyone”, I have said that some (few?) people in GNOME demonstrate to have a lack of consideration about the importance of Code of conduct, and I feel it as a lack of consideration for individuals, contributors, users themselves. I hope Ubuntu will avoid the same mistake, having a better behaviour regarding user and contributors needs.
    Moreover, I’m not talking about Ubuntu vs GNOME, I’m only referring about my experiences and my opinions about both communities.

    • Deindre you said in the original post:

      ” That is our, Ubuntu strength, our respect for everyone.”

      So the wording is different than what I quoted in my reply but the meaning is at its core, the same. (I am making allowance for what I understand to be the fact that English is not a first language for you. Though frankly I think you’re better at it then you suggest. It was well written).

      To be sure I am not arguing with your intent. It does seem to be a good idea to respect everyone. But it’s an impossibility because cultures and persons have different definitions of what respect means. I am decidedly Irish American of the O’Foirtcheirn Sept (sort of like a clan). Our way of respecting people is getting RIGHT to the point about a thing of disagreement, no beating around the bush. For this we’re accused (as you saw) of being “angry” when we’re not. Or of “bitching”, which we’re not. We’re expressing. If someone doesn’t disagree with one of our Sept we’re confused as to what we did that makes them not like us. Disagreeing with others is natural and to not do so is interpreted by us as a sign disrespecting our strength and ability to deal with a different idea. Yet others interpret disagreement as dislike or disrespect, which is exactly the opposite of how we interpret it. So, as mentioned this causes those of my Sept to find ourselves consistently accused of feelings we simply don’t have.

      Also this isn’t an Gnome or Ubuntu issue for me as I am not aware of the politics so much
      of Gnome. I am well aware of the politicing of Ubunteros. If there is a suggestion that Gnome lacks a “Code of Conduct” and that is disrespectful I disagree. (Assuming they have no “Code of Conduct”). I should not have to sign any document to VOLUNTEER my time freely. On the other hand the Ubuntu Code of Conduct has not proven itself the paragon of respect so many claim. So far, every single accusation of a violation of the CoC has absolutely nothing to do with the CoC.

      For instance claims of not being “family friendly” in word choice. But if you ask what words are forbidden no answer will ever be given. Or claims that a blog post or a facebook post, ENTIRELY HAVING NOTHING to do with Ubuntu and OUTSIDE of its controls, is a violation of the CoC. Further the CoC doesn’t say what you are allowed to think, say or do, in or out of Ubuntu. What it DOES address is HOW to handle DISAGREEMENTS.

      So saying “you hate people you violated the CoC by posting this article which used this swear word” is actually the CoC violation, NOT the posting of the swear word. But, not a single case of CoC accusations has ever pointed this out.

      So sure, if Gnome has no CoC, I’d say they are MORE respectful than a group of bullies that require you to sign a document so they can time and again make false accusation against you on the basis of that document. Of course, maybe Gnome does have a CoC and I am misunderstanding the exact thing you are objecting to.

      • If there is a suggestion that Gnome lacks a “Code of Conduct” and that is disrespectful I disagree. (Assuming they have no “Code of Conduct”). I should not have to sign any document to VOLUNTEER my time freely. On the other hand the Ubuntu Code of Conduct has not proven itself the paragon of respect so many claim. So far, every single accusation of a violation of the CoC has absolutely nothing to do with the CoC.

        Oh, Dear Lord! Are you the reincarnation of Zeno of Elea? OK, you disagree, but do you really need to demonstrate us you reasons? Come on, peace out 😉

  11. Hi folks,

    I find it great, to have different options – Gnome, KDE, XFCE, LXDE… – it is great, that people can decide.

    There are so many ways of work – so many efficient ways getting things done. I have seen many people getting the best out of their tools in different ways – different jobs need different approaches. I don’t find that a problem of Linux or Ubuntu, having so many options.
    Important is just to have common interfaces that allows a developer to easily integrate with different desktops and different technologies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s