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. -jag -- --------------------------------------------------------- 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