Re: [Usability]Re: Feedback on GNOME 2

In the hopes of resolving this daylong thread into something that is of
value, let me see if I can (politically) summarize the points made in
the various subthreads.

1) Derek is representing a constituency of GNOME users who feel that
GNOME2 as represented by RedHat 8.0 lacks the kind of flexibility in
user experience that as users of GNOME 1.4 they were used to. He wishes
this to change. Furthermore, he feels the development team is out of
touch with the needs and desires of his constituency, as he views the
GNOME developers' vision as "one size fits all". In his experience,
users feel more flexibility is better.

2) Darren voiced his feelings (I think?) that GNOME 2 is unfinished as
it stands and as such should not have been released by RedHat. Jeff
pointed out that RedHat 8.0 was a tailored version of GNOME 2.0.1 which
the GNOME team felt was ready for release.

3) Jeff emphasized that there is a difference between the GNOME project
and RedHat. They each release their own software and have their own
goals and target audiences. Darren and Derek clarified that their
initial comments centered around the seeming unconfigurability of RedHat
8.0's Bluecurve GUI.

4) Havoc chimed in to reaffirm the GNOME project's stated goals that it
is not trying to be either "one-size-fits-all" in that it assumes a
single configuration works for everybody or so configurable out the ass
that it can be absolutely everything for everybody. It fills a niche,
and if you don't like the particular niche it fills, there are other
projects and other platforms you can plug in to your pleasure. Use the
right tool for the right job. Jeff echoed the spirit of Havoc's comments
by pointing out that Sawfish is still the default WM in GNOME 2.0.x and
has the type of configurability that Derek and Darren were noting was
lacking in RedHat 8.0.

5) What followed was a clarification of politics and manners when
submitting bugs, RFE's, etc. It should be kept in mind when making
observations and providing feedback that the software in question is
most often a labor of love and feedback should be given to the
developers with appropriate respect and appreciation. As in any
situation such as this, presenting the problem in such a manner that
makes the developers *want* to help you often produces better, faster,
and more effective dialog. And since we all want the same thing, it's
best for everybody to submit comments/suggestions/criticism with
deferences to the programmers.

Anyways, I hope nobody strenuously objects to my characterization of the
discussion and that we can move on.


Joshua Adam Ginsberg	       Cellphone: 713.478.1769
Rice University '02	       Email: joshg myrealbox com
St. Mark's School of Texas '98
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a 
little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor 
safety." - Benjamin Franklin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]